Pantheon: Rise of the Fallen - High Fantasy MMO

[lostforever]

This didn't really peek my interest too much.
First off it seems like "just another mmo". Yet another mmo trying to say it has a large explorable world..I mean, why wouldn't it? Which mmo doesn't? (please don't respond to that question )
Secondly I don't like the group focus. A part of the reason why I enjoy mmo's is the fact that I can choose to play solo or with people as I feel by my mood. Playing solo in an mmo is a fantastic feeling because the world feels more alive when you have other players running past you and sometimes interacting with you. Having a big focus on grouping really puts me off.

Another thing. I don't mind kickstarter at all. I've backed a few games..but backing an mmo seems rather risky, as they are much more expensive.

I am fairly sure playing solo will be an option since even original Everquest and Vanguard allowed lot of solo play. However MMOs released in the last 5 years or so pretty much removed group content in favor of solo play and this MMO is trying to shift the focus away from solo to group and that is why it is targeted at select group of players. Also the content will be really hard, you will be scared of seeing mobs out in the open world hard! So this won't be "just another mmo" compared to the current MMOs out there but it will be "just another mmo" compared to the ones released 10 years ago.

Also MMO need not be be expansive if they are targeted at select group of people. There are many MMOs being made with $10+ million budgets. I hope many of these will succeed then it will show to the suits in the industry that you don't need to spend $200+ million to make MMOs.

 

[wolfing]

This didn't really peek my interest too much.
First off it seems like "just another mmo". Yet another mmo trying to say it has a large explorable world..I mean, why wouldn't it? Which mmo doesn't? (please don't respond to that question )
Secondly I don't like the group focus. A part of the reason why I enjoy mmo's is the fact that I can choose to play solo or with people as I feel by my mood. Playing solo in an mmo is a fantastic feeling because the world feels more alive when you have other players running past you and sometimes interacting with you. Having a big focus on grouping really puts me off.

Another thing. I don't mind kickstarter at all. I've backed a few games..but backing an mmo seems rather risky, as they are much more expensive.

nothing wrong with wanting to solo, there are more than plenty of MMOs (like 99% of them) where you can and actually do better if you solo, until the very end and so called "end game". This game is hopefully not for you, and let me explain why...

I have always been of the thought that MMOs where people can easily solo hurts those who want to group. Everquest almost forced you to group (at least when I played it, the first few years), from a very early level instead of just at end-game. That meant that it was much easier to find a group (since everybody had to group), and when you invited someone, they knew how to act (a cleric that didn't know how to heal properly wouldn't make it too far). My problem with grouping in most MMOs I've played in the last 8 or so years is that every member in the group is basically "soloing together", basically doing the same thing they do when soloing.

I would prefer if content was really oriented towards grouping, while still providing things to do when you don't have the time or mood to group (crafting, gathering, etc).

 

[Nyx]

Don't get me wrong, I love grouping and challenges. I love wiping, then rethinking/polishing tactics and trying again. But I do not want to be bound by having to group every time I want to play a game. I want the possibility to explore stuff on my own that includes more than staring at trees and flowers.
Now by no means am I saying that's how this game will be of course.

 

[Carnifex]

Personally, even nowadays in EQ 2, most of the game is soloable. I would like to see a game that harkens back to the likes of EQ1 and Vanguard, where grouping is almost mandatory for certain accomplishments. I think any mmo that gets a lot of support via the money and people of the same wants/desires will do just fine.

 

[Hastar]

That is a nice $250 tier. Think I will have to back this. Yes please keep us updated on this Kickstarter.

 

[Acleacius]

Sweet!

Just learned of it, count me in those are some extremely talented developers !

 

[Drithius]

I think that this project holds amazing promise for anyone experienced with what Everquest and Vangaurd brought to the table and what's been lost in MMOs ever since then. Anyone who says this is "just another MMO" clearly hasn't played either of those titles.

No handholding.
No single player RPG wrapped up in the clothes of an MMO.

My primary concern is how McQuaid is promising a title to backers, yet still relying on the uncertainties of his operation getting picked by a publisher "once the ball gets rolling."

More coverage, please, Couch!

 

[CraigCWB]

Personally, even nowadays in EQ 2, most of the game is soloable. I would like to see a game that harkens back to the likes of EQ1 and Vanguard, where grouping is almost mandatory for certain accomplishments. I think any mmo that gets a lot of support via the money and people of the same wants/desires will do just fine.

Me too. And in EQ, at least EQ as it was while McQuaid was in charge, grouping was mandatory not just for certain accomplishments, but for anything worth doing, really. I played a Shaman (nobody attempted more than one character the first year or so, leveling up and getting loot was way the hell too hard for that) and could solo most mobs within a level of me, but it took so damn long and the price of failure was a naked corpse retrieval deep in enemy territory, I tended not to do it much unless I wanted a hellacious challenge. Anyway, early EQ was far and away my best MMO experience, so I'm more than a little interested in how this one turns out

 

[DArtagnan]

The time for group centric hardcore MMOs is all but gone. People may think they want to play that kind of game again, but they generally won't have the time or the inclination.

New gamers are too conditioned for a casual challenge - so they won't want to play either.

This will be a niche game at best.

 

[CraigCWB]

Niche is exactly what he's looking for. Check the video about four and a half minutes in.

 

[DArtagnan]

Fair enough - I hope it's a success.

I really liked Vanguard as a concept, and I was always sad to see it fail so hard. It stands up there with Age of Conan as an MMO with tremendous potential that was released way too soon.

 

[CraigCWB]

Age of Conan turned me off by frontloading all the content into the tutorial area that they allowed reviewers and demo players free access too. Was really disappointing to leave that area and find that the quests all turned into "go fetch", and also that I'd heard the last of the fully voiced dialog. I don't think they ever did backfill the rest of the game with quality content, so it wasn't really a time issue so much. I'd agree it did have a lot of potential, though. But then, that can be said of many games. The PvP was pretty good, at least. Warhammer came out within a year or so of that, and it disappointed me much more. I think that one really could have been something special if the devs had stuck to their DAoC roots and just tried to evolve what they'd already proven themselves good at. And again, the PvP was pretty good, in my opinion, but only the open world variety. Unfortunately, at least on my server, most people opted to que up for their arena PvP (or whatever they called it), because they made it so fast and easy to get in and out of.

And I suspect this game, like EQ, won't really support PvP. McQuaid doesn't seem very interested in offering that kind of player experience. That's another thing in his favor, most likely. There are a fair number of people who hate PvP and will be relieved it's not in an MMO they are playing. I'm not sure why but PvP really does seem to stress a lot of people out.

 

[DArtagnan]

I enjoy PvP when it's done well, but it's almost never done well. Eve Online is a good example of how I think PvP should work - but unfortunately the game is dull as dishwater in terms of moment-to-moment gameplay and overall mechanics.

But this game clearly isn't for me - as I won't have the time or patience to dedicate to an MMO on that level again - so the lack of PvP obviously doesn't bother me.

I've found that games that demand a big investment very rarely make me feel the investment is worth it these days. MMOs are especially bad at not giving back.

My obsession with WoW ruined me. Well, or fixed me depending on your point of view.

 

[wolfing]

They just added a bunch of add-ons. I increased my pledge $40 for 6 months prepaid subscription. You can also add beta or alpha access to your current pledge, extra backpack space, extra bank vault, etc.

 

[Carnifex]

I'm fine with it being a niche game, tbh. All I need is enough people to group with on a daily basis, and I'll have no trouble with that in a game like this. I really think people underestimate how much old school EQ'rs and UO folks are really looking for a challenging game these days, and they aren't easy to find. I'm enjoying EQ2 for now, they've put in quite a few new dungeons over the past few months, but I see a time when I'll be ready for something else.