Pan'Theon: Rise' of th'e Fal'Len - #1 Thread in MMO

Lysis

N00b
102
0
That's such bullshit. Honestly. Does it hitch? Yes. Other then that, what are your issues? Because I only have two. It hitches, and the server is a graveyard.
I don't recall the hitching being a big issue for me. It's not ideal, but it's nowhere close to game breaking.

What killed VG was its launch. It was pushed out the door completely unstable for most users. It did not become stable for most users until 8-10 months after its launch.

Stability issues + vision 2.0 gameplay with exp loss and corpse runs = EXTREMELY FRUSTRATING. It was a horrible experience. IMO, most who quit early, never returned. When/if they did return over the years, the vision 2.0 gameplay was gone and the game ridiculously easy. You have to consider VG had no marketing at launch. None. It sold more than 200K copies early via vision 2.0 word of mouth alone.
 

arallu

Golden Knight of the Realm
536
47
I agree, at this point more physical stuff, from t-shirts with Pantheon or class emblems on it, to more expensive signed stuff, could help in just raw pledge dollars. Granted it'll eat into the bottom line, but if it helps hit the goal I say go for it.
Quoting myself, but maybe something like this for $25:
rrr_img_57822.jpg
 

Column_sl

shitlord
9,833
7
here, let me give you an EQ1 example of this.

The Enchanter casts Fear
The Druid casts Snare
The Rogue backstabs the fleeing mob

omg a simplified skill chain. don't freak out.
Except the player came up with that not the fucking devs that force skill chains based on bonuses.

You guys want the same bullshit game that is already out there..
EQ2 fucking sucked


What killed VG was its launch. It was pushed out the door completely unstable for most users.
Thats utter horseshit, the game was broken everywhere. The devs refused to listen to any feedback on there systems, and the game at launch showed it.

We went through like 1000 pages on FOH with people begging them to fix there shitty game with great suggestions, and they thought they knew better.
 

tad10

Elisha Dushku
5,518
583
here, let me give you an EQ1 example of this.

The Enchanter casts Fear
The Druid casts Snare
The Rogue backstabs the fleeing mob

omg a simplified skill chain. don't freak out.
Why was Snare cast second? Was the mob beating on the enchanter? And where's the tank? And why isn't the Cleric healing?
 

tad10

Elisha Dushku
5,518
583
Except the player came up with that not the fucking devs that force skill chains based on bonuses.

You guys want the same bullshit game that is already out there..
EQ2 fucking sucked
I will say I prefer flat classes (no talent trees/specs) and set abilities myself. I'll also add that I think they are easier to execute and "balance" (wtf that means) as Mulligan has pointed out.

But whatever - I'll roll with the combat doc if a game shows up eventually.
 

Sithro

Molten Core Raider
1,497
197
I hate all that shit.

Can we have one game were they aren't trying to re invent the wheel again??? sounds like the same bullshit they tried with Vanguard.

Just make classes with set skills/spells. No fucking choices, and roll with that shit. Let the players create new possibilities that the devs didn't think of like they did in EQ.
Vanguard's classes were really fucking good, though.

Blood Mage master race represent.
 

Column_sl

shitlord
9,833
7
Vanguard classes were excellent. Just about every one if then was welcome in groups as well.
Which is boring as shit, EQ wasn't like that.
That kind of grouping philosophy were everyone is the same just begs for people with no skill.

Those type of MMOs are everywhere. You want to be different go back to the original MMOs
 

Erronius

<WoW Guild Officer>
<Gold Donor>
16,848
43,288

He needs to target current MMO players.

The interview or whatever with Boogie should focus on one theme - 'this is what you missed if you never got to play early EQ, and now is your chance to experience it'.
That might be a hard sell though. Look at our endless forum debates over designing new MMOs with old MMO features - even half the people here that played EQ1 don't want an EQ1 clone, and it's as though each sides speaks a different language. Now take people who never played a 1st gen MMO and try to convince them that they should 'take a step back' to play something like that...because....

I could see someone sell it as a game that"...gives characters and achievements meaning without making past achievements worthless..."for example since for a lot of the newer players WOW was not an "answer" to the issues from EQ1 that were already familiar. So their point of view is just hanging in midair in a sense...and it's possible that a move backward (in our POV) to a 1st gen type MMO might be a step forward for them.

I'm not sure that I 100% buy the above, I just admit the possibility. But I would NOT want to be the person to try selling that to 'new' gamers, that could be a hard sell. And for all the people that look to Pantheon as "saving" this portion of the MMO market so to speak, bear in mind that if it goes south it could in fact solidify the opinion in the WOW generation that EQ1 and others have/had absolutely nothing to offer.
 
437
0
Which is boring as shit, EQ wasn't like that.
LOL, you're advocating for a system where some classes/races are purposely crapified? Glad you're not on the development team. Class balance was one of the worst aspects of EQ. The fact that some classes were uni-dimensional or borderline useless was terrible. That's one of the last things I'd want copied in a modern MMO.
 

Flc_sl

shitlord
121
0
Since we've gotten sidetracked back to your original post that's not what Smed said. AFAICT, Smed said VG was never profitable when it was his FTP that wasn't profitable (I think it might have been a "net loss" quote - same point applies).

Whatever, I won't choad up this thread with this discussion anymore - feel free to take the parting shot.
You have a truly amazing ability to state things with such a level of aggression that they appear like you A) know what you're talking about, or B) are facts rather than hypotheticals or opinions.

That said: if Vanguard was profitable under a subscription model, they wouldn't have transitioned to a free to play model. The only time games have ever gone from subscription to free to play, starting way back with Dungeons and Dragons Online, is when they were in the red and the subscription model was no longer sustainable or profitable.

For most games, going free to play has been an incredible success. DDO. LotRO. SWTOR. Even Warhammer extended its life by a significant chunk of time by going partially F2P.

I have no idea why the same thing didn't work for Vanguard, aside from the fact it was a shit game with a shit engine - even if the ideas behind it were brilliant. But the SWTOR engine is absolute trash as well, so who knows why it worked for them.

This entire "Smed killed Vanguard with F2P" argument you're trying to make is nonsense though. Smed has made a bunch of idiotic decisions, yes, but in regards to Vanguard the idiocy was all in investing dollars into a broken shell of a game that undergone a hellish development process with an absent, opiate-addicted studio head who was bailed out by the fact that nepotism is/was alive and well at SOE.
 

tad10

Elisha Dushku
5,518
583
Which is boring as shit, EQ wasn't like that.
That kind of grouping philosophy were everyone is the same just begs for people with no skill.

Those type of MMOs are everywhere. You want to be different go back to the original MMOs
Generally I'd agree but VG's healing classes w/ the DT mechanic was an improvement on the EQ Cleric.