Gamers are fickle and unforgiving. Once its over its over. Only games I know of that got more players after launch than at launch were EvE and ESO, and ESO went buy to play and some people might claim there were more players at launch than after they went B2P. But that can be debated. Other than that games sold mass units people played for a month (when there were subs and free 30 days) and then pops died.
Look at Conan Exiles. Their numbers have tanked. Yes, they sold 300K (best guesses) unit but they have slowed dramatically the past few days. They had 35K people at peak on their highest day, with around 90K units sold. They havent gotten above 25K since despite selling 3 times as many units sold. They barely got above 22500 players at peak today.
And that game has been hyped to heaven a cut and paste of a game that has sold 4.5 million copies and still has 70K players at peak (bug rebound for ARK there) , and it has been billed as a 'mature' game as opposed to a 'kiddie' game. But its still boring as hell and once the new factor wears off its over, that took 2 days by my estimation.
To have 'success' you have to have a game that is different enough to be different, and popular enough to retain players. That also means you need mass amounts of content, developed and semi repetitive (that doesnt feel like a grind).
Not saying these guys cant do that but its highly unlikely. Because no indie outfit has ever done it. Even ones with triple digits millions in funds (allegedly).
New games are only as good as the length of their 'wow' factor. Where their art or their mobs or their whatever still has some appeal and isnt suddenly 'ho hum'. GW2 good example. Centaurs were awesome during beta. But that 'wow' factor got old quick. "Dynamic" events were cool until people realized they followed the same script and timer every single time and werent dynamic at all.
Thats why I say this game is ultra niche. Not many people will play it anyway and the retention of those players will be relegated to the hardcore fans. Thats just reality. Sure you might win a few people over but again the number there will be tiny as well.
You could be right. (((shrugs))) I see it differently. We have been spoon fed games like CE for years. Developers trying to cash in on the fast cash MOBAs has. They thought they could bring both together and make something that made even more money. The line between MMO and MOBA is so fine MMO fans are not even sure why they are not enjoying them selves.
EQ1 fans have been asking for EQ2 for over 10 years. SoE made such a different game they made two fan bases and EQ1 fans were still asking for a updated fresh new home.
I think Pantheon fans will show up. EQ1 fans will show up. People sick of playing the same Twitch game will show up. If they build it well, there is a vacuum space waiting for them to fill.
But those are trying (unsuccessfully) to latch onto the games that make BILLIONS, and are now almost 'main stream". Not a fan but ESPN mag had quite an article about skins in those games and how addicting it is. So they show the dark side of gaming as well as highlighting the big money aspect of streamers and youtubers.
Which I am sure these guys all hate. They cant scratch and claw enough money to buy a cup of coffee let alone make a game, while these games make SKINS (yes skins) sell for more money that Pantheon raised in their failed kickstarter.
I am sure these things are what makes Roberts justify what he is doing to some extent.
But the very first thing I said about this project was McQuaid, and I literally laughed at it. And I was encouraged when the kickstarter failed, but saddened when it tried the grass roots approach.
We will see and it isnt any great prediction to make claims games will fail. But then again the only game I said would be any good was ARK. Which it has been even though my over all opinion on that crew has diminished quite a bit. And IMO that is really the only game that has been semi successful recently (and it isnt even officially released). MAYBE Elite Dangerous. But I never made any comments on that game at all, I dont play it and have never even seen gameplay footage. So any opinion I might have would be based on what I have read other people claim. Which is obviously subjective but in the grand scheme from what I have seen one could make a claim it is a 'success'. SO if those two are the only examples in the past 5 years or so (barring ESO, GW2, Archeage and MAYBE Black Desert) then its an obvious short list. Considering the number of games and expansions and updates that have come out recently even if you include all those the list is short.
I just won't pledge a lot of games simply because I have no access to development teams, no way to seriously get feed-back from the developers and we all know it takes over 9000 developers to screw in a single light-bulb because they never listen to anything you tell them, I've learned this over the years from many many games countless times.
So no I don't really pledge games for anything over $50.
Pledged on failed Kickstarter to show support. Would pledge again if it was more official such as another KS or Fig. The current pledge structure to them directly seems a bit shady.
But love the idea for the game. Good luck to them.
I just won't pledge a lot of games simply because I have no access to development teams, no way to seriously get feed-back from the developers and we all know it takes over 9000 developers to screw in a single light-bulb because they never listen to anything you tell them, I've learned this over the years from many many games countless times.
So no I don't really pledge games for anything over $50.
Just an FYI, the developers from VR are active on this forum and the one for pledgers on the official forum. They have been engaging and listening. For instance VR gave the list of class/race combos. The fans spoke up about no Elf/Cleric and other points and they said they are listening to their pledgers. There maybe a change coming.
Pledging on Pantheon now would be no different then the countless millions that were pledged towards Star Citizen. People paid for virtual ships before there even was a game and $130+ million and several years later, it's still far from being a finished product. At least with Pantheon, it won't require even a fraction of $130 million to finish.
Yes, pledging for one indie crowdfunded game is similar to another, but at least in the case of Pantheon, they aren't trying to sell you things that should only be obtainable through playing the game. Star Citizen is literally selling away the progression that keep people subscribed.
I'll never pledge another game again for any reason. I will wait until the game is released then if it looks good I'll pick it up. Besides all that... They really screwed the pooch with their Kickstarter and when Brad took some of the development money and went on vacation with his family it really put me off anything he has a hand in.
Nope. He said he didn't want solo players playing his game. And while I group 75-80% of the time in an MMO (even WoW I group most of the time), I do NOT support FORCED activity. The only people who like forced grouping are anti-social people who can't properly socialize unless they were forced to, which makes it NOT a social experience when its FORCED.
So he pretty much said for a huge portion of the playerbase he didn't want their money. No wonder their kickstarter failed.
That ass backward logic lol. I'm only slightly interested in pantheon atm, but at least they have shown live streams of groups playing. I especially liked the cliff areas where characters had to climb. Still I'm old enough to take a wait n see approach.
Your assertion that the team is intent on forcing people to group is exaggerated. They want to design the game around grouping whereas many other games design around solo play. They said you can solo lots of content but it will be harder.
Making claims like yours is plain and simple spreading false info. It's as bad as the hardcore pve people saying pvp will be less than an afterthought when one of the devs is a huge pvp fan and they have stated pvp servers will be on the table, and they are interested in developing for pvp expansion after release.
After reading this thread I decided to check out the pledges on their website. A $50 pledge doesn't even get you beta access.....
$100 used to get you alpha, but those spots have filled up. They want to have targeted test phases where they focus on specific areas and mechanics. Eventually they had to gate the number of people to do so effectively. Pantheon is not an "early access" game where they milk players by allowing them to play an unfinished game.
There will most likely be an open beta phase, as well as a free trial for people to get a feel for the game before spending any money.
After reading this thread I decided to check out the pledges on their website. A $50 pledge doesn't even get you beta access.....
$100 used to get you alpha, but those spots have filled up. They want to have targeted test phases where they focus on specific areas and mechanics. Eventually they had to gate the number of people to do so effectively. Pantheon is not an "early access" game where they milk players by allowing them to play an unfinished game.
There will most likely be an open beta phase, as well as a free trial for people to get a feel for the game before spending any money.
The only beta I am interested in is the open beta right before release so I can judge whether to buy the game. I am a horrible beta tester - I just play the game and report any bugs I run across. I don't go actively looking for bugs or try to test all systems.
Having beta or alpha access in pledge packages is actually a deterrent to me Not that I pledge anymore - Pathfinder taught me that lesson, lol.
Yeah I tend to not beta/alpha test games now days. I was in some of them that lasted almost a year and I did actually do the testing. But the problem was when the game came out, I had been most everywhere, seen everything and was about burned out. Some games like Vanguard which I tested for a year, were more fun to me in early beta as a result I didn't stick with it long after release. So I am mainly interested in late and/or open beta when the game is mostly finished. I hope this game has an open beta.
Anyways, this game's just not my cup of tea anymore after all these years later. The idea of +15 year old mechanics thriving outside its tech era of gaming seems... well... optimistically blissful...
I do, however, hope it is successful and provides a home for the ones who desire this.
Anyways, this game's just not my cup of tea anymore after all these years later. The idea of +15 year old mechanics thriving outside its tech era of gaming seems... well... optimistically blissful...
I do, however, hope it is successful and provides a home for the ones who desire this.
What 15 year old mechanics are you speaking of specifically? Because most of what we see in new games that aren't action combat still employ most of those same mechanics. They just removed any real penalty for failing, and open world content. It's not like there's been any real "innovation" that Pantheon will lack.
Comments
I'll keep an eye on it and check it out after it releases, but I'm still not willing to trust him after all his empty promises with Vanguard.
~~ postlarval ~~
But those are trying (unsuccessfully) to latch onto the games that make BILLIONS, and are now almost 'main stream". Not a fan but ESPN mag had quite an article about skins in those games and how addicting it is. So they show the dark side of gaming as well as highlighting the big money aspect of streamers and youtubers.
Which I am sure these guys all hate. They cant scratch and claw enough money to buy a cup of coffee let alone make a game, while these games make SKINS (yes skins) sell for more money that Pantheon raised in their failed kickstarter.
I am sure these things are what makes Roberts justify what he is doing to some extent.
But the very first thing I said about this project was McQuaid, and I literally laughed at it. And I was encouraged when the kickstarter failed, but saddened when it tried the grass roots approach.
We will see and it isnt any great prediction to make claims games will fail. But then again the only game I said would be any good was ARK. Which it has been even though my over all opinion on that crew has diminished quite a bit. And IMO that is really the only game that has been semi successful recently (and it isnt even officially released). MAYBE Elite Dangerous. But I never made any comments on that game at all, I dont play it and have never even seen gameplay footage. So any opinion I might have would be based on what I have read other people claim. Which is obviously subjective but in the grand scheme from what I have seen one could make a claim it is a 'success'. SO if those two are the only examples in the past 5 years or so (barring ESO, GW2, Archeage and MAYBE Black Desert) then its an obvious short list. Considering the number of games and expansions and updates that have come out recently even if you include all those the list is short.
No.
So no I don't really pledge games for anything over $50.
But love the idea for the game. Good luck to them.
Currently Playing: DAOC Uthgard
Previously Played: UO, DAOC, Shadowbane, AC2, SWG, Horizons, COX, WOW, EQ2, LOTRO, AOC, WAR, Vanguard, Rift, SWTOR, ESO, GW2.
Your assertion that the team is intent on forcing people to group is exaggerated. They want to design the game around grouping whereas many other games design around solo play. They said you can solo lots of content but it will be harder.
Making claims like yours is plain and simple spreading false info. It's as bad as the hardcore pve people saying pvp will be less than an afterthought when one of the devs is a huge pvp fan and they have stated pvp servers will be on the table, and they are interested in developing for pvp expansion after release.
The whole game industry is a little skinny but that's another story folks
There will most likely be an open beta phase, as well as a free trial for people to get a feel for the game before spending any money.
Having beta or alpha access in pledge packages is actually a deterrent to me
So I am mainly interested in late and/or open beta when the game is mostly finished. I hope this game has an open beta.
Anyways, this game's just not my cup of tea anymore after all these years later. The idea of +15 year old mechanics thriving outside its tech era of gaming seems... well... optimistically blissful...
I do, however, hope it is successful and provides a home for the ones who desire this.
I think we won't see many releases at all this year. Half of the games they had on the 2017 poll won't even be out this year.
It's going to be another fairly barren year in the genre.
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
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