I'm surprised no one has mentioned the obvious, "it looks like Vanguard 2.0".
This looks a lot worse than Vanguard or Everquest. In fact it looks nothing like those games. It's as if someone made it as an experiment to get into a game development school.
Nothing here looks familiar to you? ( Without the mounts)
The game just looked bad and I am not talking just about the graphics.
It's not your cup of tea - nothing wrong with that.
But this is exactly what EQ1 vanilla fans have been looking for - and I am talking gameplay.
Games that are not my Cub Of Tea but dont look bad.
WoW, ArcheAge, Guild Wars 2, Star Wars The Old Republic, Vanguard, Age Of Conan, Secret World, Eve, Elder Scrolls Online, Wild Star, Crow Fall and the list goes on.
The game looks bad plain and simple. Maybe this will change but when devs show off a game it usually does not change much.
Tagging this thread for later.
Totally disagree I think the graphics are decent and love the medieval, dark and gritty fantasy style. If the graphics change very little I could care less.
Games that are not my Cub Of Tea but dont look bad.
WoW, ArcheAge, Guild Wars 2, Star Wars The Old Republic, Vanguard, Age Of Conan, Secret World, Eve, Elder Scrolls Online, Wild Star, Crow Fall and the list goes on.
The game looks bad plain and simple. Maybe this will change but when devs show off a game it usually does not change much.
Tagging this thread for later.
So basically AAA games that you probably played on release? except for Crowfall that is (which to me looks horrible as far as the art design).
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Games that are not my Cub Of Tea but dont look bad.
WoW, ArcheAge, Guild Wars 2, Star Wars The Old Republic, Vanguard, Age Of Conan, Secret World, Eve, Elder Scrolls Online, Wild Star, Crow Fall and the list goes on.
The game looks bad plain and simple. Maybe this will change but when devs show off a game it usually does not change much.
Tagging this thread for later.
So basically AAA games that you probably played on release? except for Crowfall that is (which to me looks horrible as far as the art design).
No,
What I am saying is that it has nothing to do with my cup of tea.
I can look at a game that I have no interest in and still say it looks good but its just not my type of game. It does not matter whether its AAA or not. Not being AAA is no excuse for a game to just look horrible and that is what I saw from Pantheon.
Vanguard has been a disaster. I've been a huge fan of VG (specially of his diplomacy) but most time i've been completely ALONE on areas. The only playable area was IOD, but all project has been a complete joke.
beacause of VG's Titanic, noone wants to pay for Pantheon
who can seriously trust in this project ?After watching the stream, I think this game is not going anywhere.
After years of development, it still looks like something made by a few
beginners. The voices in the stream sounded like kids
Pantheon's world was ages ahead of anything from EQ2. Saying otherwise is simply lying. They have work ahead making the characters suitable for such a world, but that will come with time.
People are so used to seeing beautiful unfinished games being sold as alphas and betas, they don't even remember what a real alpha or pre-alpha looks like.
Don't have to just watch both videos. Or may be the horse in the vangaurd video was suppose to keep running on air because it flies or something?
Ah, well it's fine. I just didn't understand how you could compare "physics" when no objects were thrown, falling or sliding. I guess I had in mind real physics problems like these types of things in early Skyrim.
I thought you saw something in either video I'd missed.
It's silly to criticize pre-alpha graphics/animations and such; the Unity engine thing, on the other hand, does make me wonder a bit more.
It's not just Pantheon, there are a couple other MMOs in-dev. atm that are using Unity. Unity is a great engine, but everyone knows it's not really built for MMO style designs. So, I do wonder why they chose it. I can only assume it's just simply for ease-of-use -- Unity is incredibly user-friendly. Regardless, I wonder how much it's going to hold some of these games back.
I really wish we had an actual released MMO built on Unity to see a live example.
Neither is Unreal Engine, but that's happened. There is no reason Unity can't be used for any game. It's all about how you utilize it.
This is Vanguard 2.0, not a bad thing, Vanguard had a lot of issues, but it also had some very good points.
Crafting was better than most MMORPG,s, diplomancy was a good new take on area buffs and some good rewards, and Goblins, funny buggers.
People remember the train wreck of conception and birth, its spotty teenage years before its shutdown were not bad, but it was way to late, that said Vanguard that's still going is populated so there is still a fondness by some for it.
So if Brad can remember the good stuff, work out what was the bad stuff and hold his shit together I personnely am interested in what becomes of this project.
It's silly to criticize pre-alpha graphics/animations and such; the Unity engine thing, on the other hand, does make me wonder a bit more.
It's not just Pantheon, there are a couple other MMOs in-dev. atm that are using Unity. Unity is a great engine, but everyone knows it's not really built for MMO style designs. So, I do wonder why they chose it. I can only assume it's just simply for ease-of-use -- Unity is incredibly user-friendly. Regardless, I wonder how much it's going to hold some of these games back.
I really wish we had an actual released MMO built on Unity to see a live example.
Neither is Unreal Engine, but that's happened. There is no reason Unity can't be used for any game. It's all about how you utilize it.
Exactly. That is an ignorant statement made by someone who hasn't taken the time to see what can be done with Unity. The Pantheon screenshots speak for themselves.
Just like some other games it looks like a rubber stamp of what's been done before.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
Games that are not my Cub Of Tea but dont look bad.
WoW, ArcheAge, Guild Wars 2, Star Wars The Old Republic, Vanguard, Age Of Conan, Secret World, Eve, Elder Scrolls Online, Wild Star, Crow Fall and the list goes on.
The game looks bad plain and simple. Maybe this will change but when devs show off a game it usually does not change much.
Tagging this thread for later.
So basically AAA games that you probably played on release? except for Crowfall that is (which to me looks horrible as far as the art design).
No,
What I am saying is that it has nothing to do with my cup of tea.
I can look at a game that I have no interest in and still say it looks good but its just not my type of game. It does not matter whether its AAA or not. Not being AAA is no excuse for a game to just look horrible and that is what I saw from Pantheon.
It was difficult to see what you were getting at as you had essentially compared it to AAA games (other than crowfall.)
So what you are saying is that you don't really like the whole EQ/Vanguard type of game which at least makes more sense.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
LMAO people thinking this is Vanguard 2.0 (and them thinking it will be the GOOD things about VG) are delusional.
As far as the graphics go play any game on the engine and you will see the graphics expectations of every other game made on that engine.
Life is Feudal looks pretty damn good, shame more people dont play it, even tough it is everything everyone claims they want from a game. But that is also a different engine. Pretty sure this one is being made with the same one that Hearthstone and Rust are on. So go look at those and you will see what this one will look like it it even gets made.
Pantheon's world was ages ahead of anything from EQ2. Saying otherwise is simply lying. They have work ahead making the characters suitable for such a world, but that will come with time.
People are so used to seeing beautiful unfinished games being sold as alphas and betas, they don't even remember what a real alpha or pre-alpha looks like.
I agree the world looks nice. However, like you've said in a bunch of posts, a good looking world doesn't mean the gameplay is good.
EQ2 is lightyears ahead with interesing complex quests, crafting, faction, and other gameplay mechanics. Saying otherwise is simply lying. Graphics aren't what counts for everything. EQ2 on maximum settings looks very nice. It's just old. EQ on the other hand has never looked really good.
I think not. I'll go ahead and quote TheBeasttt here because he covered EQ2 fairly well.
There was nothing amazing about EQ2, it was a downgrade in every way except graphics.
Two starting cities, instant teleports everywhere, less freedom, shared death penalties, non stop button spam, dumbed down mechanics, half the classes were redundant, clay fighter models, boring soulbound loot pinata, teamwork unnecessary, zero immersion, bad attempts to copy wow after launch, very few weapon models and the list goes on. EQ2 was not some misunderstood gem, it was steaming garbage.
Exactly how bad is your internet and how low you kept your settings to get such low output? I watched the whole stream on youtube at 720P and looked far better than the shit you are showing us. I guess you intentionally showing a 144P recorded gif here and trying to discourage people because you are jealous that your favorite game is now on the verge of being fucked by "they break games" but this one is going to release. Pathetic.
Boobs are LIFE, Boobs are LOVE, Boobs are JUSTICE, Boobs are mankind's HOPES and DREAMS. People who complain about boobs have lost their humanity.
As a former QA tester, I can assure you that this game actually looks pretty well for a pre-alpha version. I've played games before that just had blocks as place holders for characters before. I even was a tester for a game I'm not allowed to discuss, but it was described as one of the best looking RPGs ever, about 4 and a half years ago. The game when I got to test it was uglier than Everquest.
\Seriously, that's what you've got? That post from that dude? Really, if you want to have a real discussion and stop making excuses about Alpha, then post something worthwhile.
Sorry that I disliked EQ2, but what he said was nail on head accurate. I simply didn't enjoy it. I would take Pantheon in its current state any day of the week.
That said, and as I addressed in another thread, you're trying to compare the more advanced gameplay of one game with the low level (level 7 to be exact) gameplay of another ... another in pre-alpha no less. You're just not looking at this in its proper context. This is level 7 characters in level 7 content, with all the limitations of level 7 abilities. You're also stating that it lacked in other areas that have yet to be revealed, and not to mention the fact that Pantheon is more in the vein of classic EQ, not EQ2. You are looking at it from the wrong perspective. Its a different game. A fundamentally different type of MMO. If you're expecting solo play and quest progression till max level, you are in the wrong subforum.
I've played EQ2, and I remember exactly what the level 7 experience was. It was totally forgettable, but I did replay it again recently on the TLE and I stand by what I've said.
Comments
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
No,
What I am saying is that it has nothing to do with my cup of tea.
I can look at a game that I have no interest in and still say it looks good but its just not my type of game. It does not matter whether its AAA or not. Not being AAA is no excuse for a game to just look horrible and that is what I saw from Pantheon.
or link another contemporary video depicting "physics".
beacause of VG's Titanic, noone wants to pay for Pantheon
of course it is.
Looks like an amateurish and low cost version of Vanguard.
Saying otherwise is simply lying. They have work ahead making the characters suitable for such a world, but that will come with time.
People are so used to seeing beautiful unfinished games being sold as alphas and betas, they don't even remember what a real alpha or pre-alpha looks like.
I thought you saw something in either video I'd missed.
Crafting was better than most MMORPG,s, diplomancy was a good new take on area buffs and some good rewards, and Goblins, funny buggers.
People remember the train wreck of conception and birth, its spotty teenage years before its shutdown were not bad, but it was way to late, that said Vanguard that's still going is populated so there is still a fondness by some for it.
So if Brad can remember the good stuff, work out what was the bad stuff and hold his shit together I personnely am interested in what becomes of this project.
https://www.pantheonmmo.com/media/screenshots/
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
So what you are saying is that you don't really like the whole EQ/Vanguard type of game which at least makes more 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
As far as the graphics go play any game on the engine and you will see the graphics expectations of every other game made on that engine.
Life is Feudal looks pretty damn good, shame more people dont play it, even tough it is everything everyone claims they want from a game. But that is also a different engine. Pretty sure this one is being made with the same one that Hearthstone and Rust are on. So go look at those and you will see what this one will look like it it even gets made.
Boobs are LIFE, Boobs are LOVE, Boobs are JUSTICE, Boobs are mankind's HOPES and DREAMS. People who complain about boobs have lost their humanity.
That said, and as I addressed in another thread, you're trying to compare the more advanced gameplay of one game with the low level (level 7 to be exact) gameplay of another ... another in pre-alpha no less. You're just not looking at this in its proper context. This is level 7 characters in level 7 content, with all the limitations of level 7 abilities. You're also stating that it lacked in other areas that have yet to be revealed, and not to mention the fact that Pantheon is more in the vein of classic EQ, not EQ2. You are looking at it from the wrong perspective. Its a different game. A fundamentally different type of MMO. If you're expecting solo play and quest progression till max level, you are in the wrong subforum.
I've played EQ2, and I remember exactly what the level 7 experience was. It was totally forgettable, but I did replay it again recently on the TLE and I stand by what I've said.