The OP advice is good sound advice for any game targeting the main stream or aiming to be the next big thing. Not that the developers should listen to the forums, but if your goal is to attract everyone then trying to create the largest buzz possible is good.
It's not that having public forums avoids an echo chamber because it's going to exist anyway because the group on the forums is not everyone. It's the group that try to influence games prior to release. It's just a really big echo chamber. This is evidenced by the number of games with public forums that have made ho-hum games, attributable partly to trying to please everyone. Garbage in. Garbage out. Of course I'd be open to any actual statistics that show that games with public forums fare better, on average than those with private ones.
So if the primary purpose of the forums is to help gain feedback on a developing game, then how do you limit feedback to members of the niche you are specifically targeting? Feedback outside the niche is low value as it could send you in directions that work against your goals. In general you want to attract people who are going to like what you are making not change what your making to attract a group that likes something completely different.
I think having a barrier to entry helps. Having to pay to provide feedback helps ensure those who are genuinely interested in what you are offering will pony up. So I think it's an extremely smart marketing strategy for a company targeting a specific subset of players.
To put it another way, if you're going to target a group so large and so saturated with games that developers targeting them have to give away their games (FTP) to attract players, then a free forum makes perfect sense. If you want an exclusive group excited enough about your game that they'll pay a monthly fee for it then paying for the forums makes sense.
Uh no, having people create accounts just to troll and act like idiots is the best reason why they shouldn't open them up yet, at least not until the game is basically in beta mode.
I've been in my fair share of closed testing forums and the trolls are there regardless. Maybe not in a huge abundance, but the community itself is small anyway. The ratio isn't much different in most cases, that's because forum access is a result of having alpha/beta access (in this case it's a result of offering funds). To me trolling isn't exactly a logical excuse. As some folks simply see forum and think i'm gonna troll... Trolls still like having early/exclusive access like anyone else. As well as games to play...
It's more likely to reach a unified vision, which can be more productive at times, yet problematic if your sample size isn't representative enough of your overall chosen market. In this case it's old schoolers... Which is a broad spectrum of preference... far more diverse than the market that emerged as the early games did have more variety in design and mechanics.
In this case specifically I worry there's too much EQ representation thus far, than there is for any other, which is no surprise of course given who's behind it.. Yet that's where the worry comes from and why I feel it's possibly a echo-chamber situation at this point.
Um the exactly problem in MMORPG's today is the LACK of Everquest influence in them. Too many easy mode games that have zero emphasis on group play, community building etc.... Too many "Modern" MMORPG's feel like a solo game with a public chat room where everyone is a winner with minimal influence.
The fact that it draws HEAVILY from Everquest as a model is its MAJOR selling point.
I'd say the problem is not enough SWG influence, but see that's where the crux lays within the point I was making. SOmeone else will think not enough EVE influence, another not enough AC influence,another not enough AO, or DAOC influence. Old games were diverse in what they offered, and many system proved to work better than others depending on points of view.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
The OP advice is good sound advice for any game targeting the main stream or aiming to be the next big thing. Not that the developers should listen to the forums, but if your goal is to attract everyone then trying to create the largest buzz possible is good.
It's not that having public forums avoids an echo chamber because it's going to exist anyway because the group on the forums is not everyone. It's the group that try to influence games prior to release. It's just a really big echo chamber. This is evidenced by the number of games with public forums that have made ho-hum games, attributable partly to trying to please everyone. Garbage in. Garbage out. Of course I'd be open to any actual statistics that show that games with public forums fare better, on average than those with private ones.
So if the primary purpose of the forums is to help gain feedback on a developing game, then how do you limit feedback to members of the niche you are specifically targeting? Feedback outside the niche is low value as it could send you in directions that work against your goals. In general you want to attract people who are going to like what you are making not change what your making to attract a group that likes something completely different.
I think having a barrier to entry helps. Having to pay to provide feedback helps ensure those who are genuinely interested in what you are offering will pony up. So I think it's an extremely smart marketing strategy for a company targeting a specific subset of players.
To put it another way, if you're going to target a group so large and so saturated with games that developers targeting them have to give away their games (FTP) to attract players, then a free forum makes perfect sense. If you want an exclusive group excited enough about your game that they'll pay a monthly fee for it then paying for the forums makes sense.
I'd argue with the blockbuster you don't need as much feedback as what is popular as well as accepted is obvious and widely known. The principles in design are streamlined across the board, as well as are widely represented from title to title.
Going for "old schoolers" is something else entirely, a broad spectrum of old school influence is beneficial to understand what might work well a decade or more after those designs all but dried up.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Take a look back through the game company rhetoric of the years, "No one wanted to play Uncle Owen" particularly stands out in my mind. Take a look through these forums, hell take a look back at the ESO discussion we've been having for the past couple of days, it seems that game makers are no more immune to chafing at having their ideas and actions questioned than anyone else. Why would a dev team want to be surrounded by yes men? Because they can't take the ego bruising that someone who says no might have a point. Now I'm not saying the guys at Pantehon are guilty of doing that but I feel some of their more rabid fans sure are.
"I may be wrong? No no no fuck that, I'm going to lock my self away with my happy kittens and glitter farting unicorns and rainbows."
While I don't remember the exact quote, I'm reminded of " There's too much reading to be done" .. or something along those lines. SWG is actually a good example, well more precisely the NGE... as ironically enough all of those changes were created in a bubble. Look how that turned out..
" Now I'm not saying the guys at Pantehon are guilty of doing that but I feel some of their more rabid fans sure are."
and those are exactly the folks you don't want guiding devs hands IMO. As they're not willing to look past their own nostalgic memories, nor is the better interest of the game of concern to them, recreating feelings, and memories is all they care about.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
You do realize that the devs are posting quite a bit on MMORPG.com. They read posts there and can get a broad spectrum of feedback and ideas. It's not like open forums don't exist or the devs are ignoring them.
... I'm sure you believe that Pantheon is special and will be immune to that effect. There is always a possibility you are right. The vast likelihood, based on history... is that you are wrong. Time will tell. I hope you are right and can come back here in a few years and point it out.
Perhaps you do not understand. What you suggest has been tried. Open forums are the norms, it's not like they haven't been tried and we don't know the outcome. Perhaps Pantheon will be immune, but they have proven to be far more disasterous than anything your referencing. It can be argued that they have destroyed an entire industry, resulting in a string of games that have nothing special to recommend them. The vast likelihood is that if they are to have the effect you want they will destroy Pantheon and it's fate will be that of the majority of MMORPGs.
If you lock forums and only hear what "fans" say. This is the echo-chamber. It has nothing at all to do with what you or anyone else posts here on MMORPG. It has EVERYTHING to do with isolating developers from reality by surrounding them with a small group of people who see everything through rose-colored glasses.
I'm sure you believe that Pantheon is special and will be immune to that effect. There is always a possibility you are right. The vast likelihood, based on history... is that you are wrong. Time will tell. I hope you are right and can come back here in a few years and point it out.
It's not even what just the fans say, it's what only people who are already sold say..I do have to agree with the echo-chamber comparison, that's essentially what it is. I'm not sure why a dev team would want nothing but yes men around.
Take a look back through the game company rhetoric of the years, "No one wanted to play Uncle Owen" particularly stands out in my mind. Take a look through these forums, hell take a look back at the ESO discussion we've been having for the past couple of days, it seems that game makers are no more immune to chafing at having their ideas and actions questioned than anyone else. Why would a dev team want to be surrounded by yes men? Because they can't take the ego bruising that someone who says no might have a point. Now I'm not saying the guys at Pantehon are guilty of doing that but I feel some of their more rabid fans sure are.
"I may be wrong? No no no fuck that, I'm going to lock my self away with my happy kittens and glitter farting unicorns and rainbows."
LOL that last line was pretty epic.... Sadly... way too true.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
I think having a barrier to entry helps. Having to pay to provide feedback helps ensure those who are genuinely interested in what you are offering will pony up. So I think it's an extremely smart marketing strategy for a company targeting a specific subset of players.
OK Chief, you get your opinion and it's as valid as mine. Come back in a few years when this launches and we'll see how it turned out for ya. If you are right, I'll be playing right alongside you. I honestly don't think that will happen, but would be more than happy to be wrong!
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
I think having a barrier to entry helps. Having to pay to provide feedback helps ensure those who are genuinely interested in what you are offering will pony up. So I think it's an extremely smart marketing strategy for a company targeting a specific subset of players.
OK Chief, you get your opinion and it's as valid as mine. Come back in a few years when this launches and we'll see how it turned out for ya. If you are right, I'll be playing right alongside you. I honestly don't think that will happen, but would be more than happy to be wrong!
I understand the concern, but I'd just as soon developers not pay that much attention to message boards. On the whole I have a pretty low opinion of them as a means of customer communications. (which makes it kinda ironic that I'm posting this on one
Unlike most other games, I don't feel that the developers need much of our feedback. Though it hasn't always been as clear as it is today (since the new site), they have an extremely well thought out and detailed plan of how this game is going to be designed.
That has not been the case with other indie games currently in the works. With those games you can often see the holes in their design or desire to repeat the same mistakes. At that point one can only hope that they have a trick up their sleeve or perhaps things somehow magically pan out down the road, but that is clearly not the case with Pantheon. My only worry is how well they can implement their design, not the design itself.
The pay wall acts as a great deterrent against haters and people that have no interest in truly supporting the cause. Remember mods can and WILL be extremely biased. Besides it's not like Brad and the gang don't read other forums so if you feel that passionate either sub or just post on a free fan forum like this one.
For a niche game aimed at allowing aging gamers to recapture the glory of their EQ1 days 30-50 dollars a month is about right.
Your in a dream world, that price would kill the game over night.
Yeah it would kill the game for the 13-16 year-olds. For people in their 30s and 40s paying $30-50 a month is pocket change. You can't go see a 2 hour movie for that but it's way too much for a month of entertainment? I'm sorry but if you don't care about making your game accessible to adolescents then charging more than $15 a month is completely viable... assuming the game delivers... and that's a big assuming.
actually you are a bit wrong here what happens when you grow older is your commitments become way more.mortgage,car,home improvement,kids,holidays etc etc. so really you don't cough as much as when you are unmarried with no kids and certainly watch things more carefully. i make in $ over 100k but i can tell you i regularly scan my bank statement to see which fat needs cutting out!
For a niche game aimed at allowing aging gamers to recapture the glory of their EQ1 days 30-50 dollars a month is about right.
Your in a dream world, that price would kill the game over night.
Yeah it would kill the game for the 13-16 year-olds. For people in their 30s and 40s paying $30-50 a month is pocket change. You can't go see a 2 hour movie for that but it's way too much for a month of entertainment? I'm sorry but if you don't care about making your game accessible to adolescents then charging more than $15 a month is completely viable... assuming the game delivers... and that's a big assuming.
actually you are a bit wrong here what happens when you grow older is your commitments become way more.mortgage,car,home improvement,kids,holidays etc etc. so really you don't cough as much as when you are unmarried with no kids and certainly watch things more carefully. i make in $ over 100k but i can tell you i regularly scan my bank statement to see which fat needs cutting out!
I would not say he is wrong - rather everyone has a unique situation. As for myself I have more play money now than when I was younger and I currently have similar responsibilites (mortgage, car, home improvements, kids, holidays, etc.)
Early development (pre-alpha) only allowing backers is standard practice. They have also already given their reasons for it. There is zero reason to allow people who have zero investment in the game so early on. The developers are making the game and not random people off the street who have little concept of their vision.
The game is currently primarily privately funded and fans of the concept/game are only granted the privilege because crowd funding is also accepted. The devs are making the game and not us and this is a very, very good thing.
The forums won't open to the public likely even in beta. Perhaps only until open beta or early release. All the reasons why developers don't allow open access still exist even when crowd funding is involved. The OP is asking for a very rare exception. CU also does not allow open access to their backer forums and, again, for very good reasons.
Pantheon will grow and after they reveal solid alpha footage the hype will grow.
Edit: For those of you viewing the thread for the first time, please view these materials on participation marketing if you want a little more information as to why I'm advocating open-forum-participation:
Also, my original post references a discussion on the official forum regarding $30-50/monthly subscription. This has been officially rejected by Pantheon. The intention is to have a competitive, $15/monthly subscription plan. Don't get the wrong idea from my post.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I'm pretty damn happy with the new site and the new content.
However, Pantheon needs to open the forums to the public. Right now, a subscription is required to post on the forums. This is definitely a huge barrier to growing the community.
As a marketing guy myself (albeit not in gaming), I don't see how having this communication barrier can be helpful at all. Especially since some of the crucial topics being decided right now (such as monthly pricing) are basically being discussed in an echo chamber of people who are clearly high-end donors.
These donors are actually talking about a $30-50 monthly subscription cost as if it's nothing. This is quite shocking (even disturbing) to me. Sure, I can afford to pay $30-50 per month. And so could a bunch of other guys. But a subscription like that sure as hell won't go over well with the hordes of other people who will want to play this game. How is the Pantheon team going to obtain a clear, objective understanding of their future player-base and develop a pricing model that takes maximum advantage of potential when they're only hearing from people that have already dropped big money on this game?
I understand that forum-posting privileges were some of the original incentives for backing. But isn't it time to look towards the future? The Pantheon forums are almost empty. There's more activity on other sites than the actual site for the game. This needs to change, and quickly, if Pantheon intends to to take maximum advantage of the new site launch and pending updates.
i can afford to pay McDonalds $30-50 for a cheeseburger. but I never would. end of story.
You have to pay money to be able to post on the Pantheon game website, when the game is not even to beta? Wow.
Great feature, separates the supporters from loud mouth drive by posters trolling games they don't like or have no interest in playing.
You don't think there are any loud mouthed trolls who have $5? Or, in many cases, whose mom or dad don't have $5?
If they said "we are not letting just anybody in at this stage of the game. Only friends, family, etc.," that might make sense.
But what they are saying instead is that anyone can come in and post, whether they support the game or not, just $5 please.
Very odd.
I think that anyone stupid enough to pay money so they can troll? Well, at least VR is getting something out of it and that troll will find very quickly they are outnumbered when they start mouthing off about how "the game will fail and it needs to be just like WoW because it is the bestest game eva!"
Point is, if you feel like you need to be heard past posting here (by the way, I don't sub and Brad responds to a lot of my posts here), then sub. If that isn't good enough, if having the maker of the game come here and answer questions on these forums is beneath you, that you think they should allow you to post free on their site, well.. I would say that money gating is working just perfect. (hint: It means you are being unreasonable and would not provide anything worthy to the discussion over there. After all, look at where your constructive discussion is currently at here?).
Comments
It's not that having public forums avoids an echo chamber because it's going to exist anyway because the group on the forums is not everyone. It's the group that try to influence games prior to release. It's just a really big echo chamber. This is evidenced by the number of games with public forums that have made ho-hum games, attributable partly to trying to please everyone. Garbage in. Garbage out. Of course I'd be open to any actual statistics that show that games with public forums fare better, on average than those with private ones.
So if the primary purpose of the forums is to help gain feedback on a developing game, then how do you limit feedback to members of the niche you are specifically targeting? Feedback outside the niche is low value as it could send you in directions that work against your goals. In general you want to attract people who are going to like what you are making not change what your making to attract a group that likes something completely different.
I think having a barrier to entry helps. Having to pay to provide feedback helps ensure those who are genuinely interested in what you are offering will pony up. So I think it's an extremely smart marketing strategy for a company targeting a specific subset of players.
To put it another way, if you're going to target a group so large and so saturated with games that developers targeting them have to give away their games (FTP) to attract players, then a free forum makes perfect sense. If you want an exclusive group excited enough about your game that they'll pay a monthly fee for it then paying for the forums makes sense.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Going for "old schoolers" is something else entirely, a broad spectrum of old school influence is beneficial to understand what might work well a decade or more after those designs all but dried up.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
" Now I'm not saying the guys at Pantehon are guilty of doing that but I feel some of their more rabid fans sure are."
and those are exactly the folks you don't want guiding devs hands IMO. As they're not willing to look past their own nostalgic memories, nor is the better interest of the game of concern to them, recreating feelings, and memories is all they care about.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Sadly... way too true.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
OK Chief, you get your opinion and it's as valid as mine. Come back in a few years when this launches and we'll see how it turned out for ya. If you are right, I'll be playing right alongside you. I honestly don't think that will happen, but would be more than happy to be wrong!
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
That has not been the case with other indie games currently in the works. With those games you can often see the holes in their design or desire to repeat the same mistakes. At that point one can only hope that they have a trick up their sleeve or perhaps things somehow magically pan out down the road, but that is clearly not the case with Pantheon. My only worry is how well they can implement their design, not the design itself.
what happens when you grow older is your commitments become way more.mortgage,car,home improvement,kids,holidays etc etc.
so really you don't cough as much as when you are unmarried with no kids and certainly watch things more carefully.
i make in $ over 100k but i can tell you i regularly scan my bank statement to see which fat needs cutting out!
The game is currently primarily privately funded and fans of the concept/game are only granted the privilege because crowd funding is also accepted. The devs are making the game and not us and this is a very, very good thing.
The forums won't open to the public likely even in beta. Perhaps only until open beta or early release. All the reasons why developers don't allow open access still exist even when crowd funding is involved. The OP is asking for a very rare exception. CU also does not allow open access to their backer forums and, again, for very good reasons.
Pantheon will grow and after they reveal solid alpha footage the hype will grow.
You stay sassy!
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
If they said "we are not letting just anybody in at this stage of the game. Only friends, family, etc.," that might make sense.
But what they are saying instead is that anyone can come in and post, whether they support the game or not, just $5 please.
Very odd.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
i can afford to pay McDonalds $30-50 for a cheeseburger. but I never would. end of story.
Point is, if you feel like you need to be heard past posting here (by the way, I don't sub and Brad responds to a lot of my posts here), then sub. If that isn't good enough, if having the maker of the game come here and answer questions on these forums is beneath you, that you think they should allow you to post free on their site, well.. I would say that money gating is working just perfect. (hint: It means you are being unreasonable and would not provide anything worthy to the discussion over there. After all, look at where your constructive discussion is currently at here?).
Very odd indeed.