What happens if you don't get in on the first 4500? nor the next 4500? nor the next 4500??


Pathfinder Online

51 to 79 of 79 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Goblin Squad Member

ricardopituski wrote:
I also don’t think the initial group will be just the extensively experienced players either, or those on the message boards, or those which gave significant money. Obviously many players will come from this group, but GoblinWorks has stated several times they are serious about the casual gamer. The gamer who plays 10 to 12 hours a week, should be close in power to those who play 8 hours a day.

This is good to hear. One of the reasons I stopped MMOs was the significant time investment. I just didn’t have 30-40 hours a week anymore to play. And I still don’t. Although I am afraid if I do try out PFO, and love it, that I will be cutting down on those activities I shouldn’t be cutting down on.

Silver Crusade Goblin Squad Member

I do enjoy seeing all the math done. However, we don't know if they will stick to constant 4500 player waves. It might be they start with 4500 for the first set, then let in another 4500 for month two, then month three they up it to 6000, and steadily scale it up. I also think they'll be flexible in how many people they add per wave. The goal for the slow launch is to make sure that there are social structures emerging to support the population. If they are seeing it sooner than expected, they might accelerate the launch. If the social systems are having trouble taking hold, they might delay the schedule. Goblinworks appears to be very flexible in their design for this game, they are not getting sold on any one concept of how something must be.

Goblin Squad Member

Bobson wrote:
They could count you as gone, though, for purposes of letting more people in. "Ok, of our 4500 this month, 1500 seem to have stopped playing. That's a little high, so we'll open the doors to 6000 people for the next month."

I don't think that's their plan. They've talked about a 30% retention rate, so I think they're expecting to lose about 1,500 each month, and keep the other 3,000. I expect they'll allow 4,500 new players in each month unless something really drastic starts happening.

Alexander_Damocles wrote:
It might be they start with 4500 for the first set, then let in another 4500 for month two, then month three they up it to 6000, and steadily scale it up.

We don't know for sure, but they've been explicit that they're plan is to allow 4,500 each month for 7 months, then allow 12,000 per month for some time after that.

From A Journey of a Thousand Miles Begins with a Single Step:

Quote:

At launch, and for the first seven months following, we will cap new paying players at 4,500 per month...

After the first seven months, we'll raise the limit on new paying players to 12,000 per month. That will remain our goal for the next couple years of Pathfinder Online's life cycle.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Math check: A 30% retention rate means that they expect to keep ~1,500 of the 4500. I assume that retention would be measured 'after one year', rather than 'after one month', and I suspect that even that figure might be a little bit high.

Goblin Squad Member

I misrepresented it.

Quote:
We expect to keep only about 25% of those players on a long-term basis, so after we factor in attrition of each month's signups, we end up with 16,500 paying players at the end of that seven-month period.

Yeah, I don't think they expect to experience that attrition each month. I was just making the point that I doubted volatility in active players would have much impact on how many people they let in.

Goblin Squad Member

Ok, so I have been feverishly trying to catch up with you guys on PFO and this baby right here is the question of the 1 million pesos.

Mechanically, I can say I love everything the blog says and couldn't find a single dislike with the combat system or the settlements or the economy or the death penalty.

But this right here is the potential for disaster.

1. How will this "choosing" be done in a sufficiently transparent way as to not get people really mad. At some point GW will have to divest this info because Dev favorability can really hurt of game of this type.

And most importantly

2. With offline leveling, how does the game insure that those that get in first won't be more powerful no matter what? If that is the perception the cram to get in could look like a Black Friday. How does the late comer catch up?

Goblin Squad Member

Just buy a slot on ebay :o)

Goblin Squad Member

avari3 wrote:

2. With offline leveling, how does the game insure that those that get in first won't be more powerful no matter what? If that is the perception the cram to get in could look like a Black Friday. How does the late comer catch up?

I believe the primary means to avoid this is by overall minimizing the difference between high and low skilled characters, as well as boosting the effectiveness of characters that focus on specialties. IE in eve, someone who has spent 2 months specially focused in one area, will be about 90% as effective in that area, as even the best. The top of the line characters can switch up into many different ships and suit whatever function they wish to.

The overall design from how GW has described the intents have 2 major key things.

1. New characters, will not lose to a capstoned character 100% of the time. Even if it is a small chance, it will not be like say WoW, where a level 30 character could wail on a AFK level 50 character for an hour, and never come close to out damaging their regeneration, the difference is intended to be much more subtle.

2. At least primaraly I don't see the level of growth as particularly slow in this, when you limit it to players who are willing to pay.. I would imagine the vast majority of the players whom consider it worth it to pay for the game, while it is in early development stages, will most likely allow the majority of players who fit that criteria within the first 3 months or so. Sure tons of f2p MMO's will get 20-70K people in open beta, but maybe 5% of them would be willing to pay a dime, the majority of which are just wanting to test out the game. That crash is insanely harsh on game servers. I've played no shortage of MMO's in which the first wave of players crashes the server, delays the launch for a few days (which I assume is most likely the developers purchasing new hardware etc... to handle these people, in addition to bits of code cleanup), the game launches again, finally able to handle it, then within a week 75% of the players are gone.

Goblin Squad Member

Rafkin wrote:
Just buy a slot on ebay :o)

...and that's exactly where it gets scary. Glad you said it not me. Pay to win is the absolute worst thing you can call a game of this nature. GW has to be very careful to not be branded as such from the outset and the first test is who gets in first for a game that features offline leveling and first in has a distinct advantage.

Silver Crusade Goblin Squad Member

I just hope that the community will be rewarded for it's input and support. I mean the companies/friendships starting here and now would make up the back bone of the game initially.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

We should also expect that some pre-existing organizations that haven't been active on these forums might well get invited in the first round.

When I first started participating on these forums back in January, I was absolutely shameless about doing so in the hopes of getting in early. But I think it would be a mistake for any of us to feel entitled to that.

Grand Lodge Goblin Squad Member

I like a limted launch. I remember when EQ launched and there were so many -newb characters running around in low level zones that you would either have to queue up to get a mob, or try and steal a mob.

It made for a difficult beginning.

The other point of the limited launch, is to help GW iron out bugs, give them developmental feedback and start buildling a community.

GW knows that the people that donated to the Kickstarter are very interested in the type of game they are producing. They are also intelligent enough to figure out that the most interested people will also be the best ambassadors -- getting their friends to want to play, and becoming members of the community.

We are all excited. My bet is that the Goblin Squad members will get early invites.

Can't wait to meet all of you in game, to share an ale and story, and go out with you into the world and explore.

Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:

We should also expect that some pre-existing organizations that haven't been active on these forums might well get invited in the first round.

When I first started participating on these forums back in January, I was absolutely shameless about doing so in the hopes of getting in early. But I think it would be a mistake for any of us to feel entitled to that.

I concur, and would also add that given what PFO is planned to be (sandbox + player-interaction), we should expect that GW would, and should, handpick the early people in order to setup the best sort of environment for their vision. Given their vision it will be of paramount importance to get that foundational community right.

Goblin Squad Member

JRR wrote:


I think you're wrong. I'm anticipating Pathfinder more than any other MMO EVER. And I've played most of them. But if I don't get in the first month, maybe the second, I'll lose interest fast.

And what will get your interest?

And how long will that keep your interest?

All due respect, but you sound like you might be flighty.
Today you want to play PFO more than anything, but tomorrow?

Quote:
I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels that way.

I'm sure that you aren't. This is why games spike; People want to play them as soon as they come out.

Thing is, many of those same people move on to the next thing so that they can be amongst the first to play it when it launches, too.

When you are looking for people to help shape and develop a game, those aren't the best people to rely upon.

Quote:
I think you vastly underestimate the MILLIONS of people looking for something different than WoW. I anticipate a monsoon of customers just dying to get into PFO, and then moving on to whatever the newest game is, or continuing to play game x and forgetting about PFO.

Again, many people just do this as a matter of course, not because they got passed over for this round of invitations.

People that do not come when invited are probably not that interested in helping shape the game, so no big loss.
Many of those same people, however, will come into the process whenever the new and shiny has worn off of whatever it was they jumped into because they couldn't jump into PFO.

Quote:
When given the choice to play one game, or waiting in line to play a better game, well, this is the age of instant gratification. You'll lose a ton of customers. if you turn them away, they'll become someone else's customer.

If PFO is indeed a "better game", then it will still be here when those people that are more interested in immediate gratification than helping test PFO get tired of whatever it is that they jumped into while waiting.

And if they never tire of that other thing, then good for them. I hope that they enjoy themselves.

Goblin Squad Member

Also keep in mind that, regardless of how many negative things you think will happen if PFO goes ahead with its plans to limit growth to 4500 players per month for the first 7 months, there are far, far worse things that would happen if they didn't - many of them painstakingly detailed by Ryan in numerous posts here and on the blog.

Goblin Squad Member

JRR wrote:
Ryan Dancey wrote:
coach wrote:


What about the customers you may lose if they don't get an invite in the first few months?

While this is a risk, I think the risk is minimal.

I think you're wrong. I'm anticipating Pathfinder more than any other MMO EVER. And I've played most of them. But if I don't get in the first month, maybe the second, I'll lose interest fast. I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels that way. I think you vastly underestimate the MILLIONS of people looking for something different than WoW. I anticipate a monsoon of customers just dying to get into PFO, and then moving on to whatever the newest game is, or continuing to play game x and forgetting about PFO. When given the choice to play one game, or waiting in line to play a better game, well, this is the age of instant gratification. You'll lose a ton of customers. if you turn them away, they'll become someone else's customer.

I think you are overestimating how many people are lining up to play Pathfinder Online.

Pathfinder Online Kickstarter
Start Citizen Pledge Drive

To be fair Star Citizen's pledge drive did last longer, and was on two websites, but it still raised about twenty times as much money.

I'm not saying to this to discourage anyone. 300k is still amazing, and I still have high hopes for this project.

What I am saying is this game's demand is not so high that they currently need to worry that much about a massive quantity of players busting down their doors to get a copy. I have no doubt they can exceed the initial 4500 but I think their idea of taking things slow and building the hype gradually is a smart approach.

Goblin Squad Member

Andius wrote:


I think you are overestimating how many people are lining up to play Pathfinder Online.

Pathfinder Online Kickstarter
Start Citizen Pledge Drive

To be fair Star Citizen's pledge drive did last longer, and was on two websites, but it still raised about twenty times as much money.

I'm not saying to this to discourage anyone. 300k is still amazing, and I still have high hopes for this project.

What I am saying is this game's demand is not so high that they currently need to worry that much about a massive quantity of players busting down their doors to get a copy. I have no doubt they can exceed the initial 4500 but I think their idea of taking things slow and building the hype gradually is a smart approach.

Completely agreed there, I mean a simple fact... the total number of people who contributed to the kickstarter... is less than the total of invites intended for the first month.

I do however have to point out one key thing in the contributions worth noting. People contributing to the kickstarter, were informed more or less that the donations weren't even to the final game, but to the tech demo. Which was a practice that to many people was controversial, (just look at any unofficial forum etc... I'm not saying it was wrong, but I would say there are quite a few people who would not support it, simply on the grounds that they did not want to put money towards the demo. Why GW did this I fully understand, it was to draw bigger fish as they were not counting on the kickstarter fully funding it, but we will never know what the results would/could have been, had the kickstarter been used under the intent of fully funding the game.

Goblin Squad Member

The capped entry was one of the first things that really made me go "Wow these guys are really coming at this intelligently."

Someone having to wait to play a game that they hear great things about may well be frustrating, but they will still want to play. If anything it will make them want to play it even more.

Goblin Squad Member

Onishi wrote:
I do however have to point out one key thing in the contributions worth noting. People contributing to the kickstarter, were informed more or less that the donations weren't even to the final game, but to the tech demo.

Of interest is that the model is not unique now - The Goon kickstarter followed a similar vein, funding a story reel that would be used to try and secure big $ funding.

Goblin Squad Member

I think it'll turn out fine. While I do of course want to play as soon as I can, and it sounds more prestigious when you're one of the first settlements or companies, I'm sure it'll work out in the end. If the server keeps expanding, there should always be a new frontier to strive for. Or if not, integrating into an existing social structure and rising the ranks and expanding what already exists can be just as much fun.

If people are really interested in what PFO offers, I doubt waiting a while longer should hurt their enthusiasm too much.

Goblin Squad Member

I am pretty sure it will turn out just fine also. Most of the backers are likely to be involved enough to be in a company or organization already. So GW simply finds the heads of these and gets the names of people in their companies or organizations and invites them. This way they are covering both at the same time. Most backers get an invite, and the organizations are there and introduced when needed. When they need bad guys, they give invites to "Tony's" (Blaeringr or Nihimon or whichever) and they come into play. If they want organizations to be less than 100 people, they only give them 50 invites.

GW says, "Hey <company head>, we need Tony's. Send us 10 of your peoples names and emails for invites."
<Company head> says, "Here they are"
BAM !! 10 invites and Tony's is now viable.

Goblin Squad Member

I'm very happy with GW's approach of limited and staggered access to develop a cohesive community and therefore a chance for a positive in-game culture and standard modus operandi around interactions. I've realised these forums have a good community and the sort of people that are much better than me at providing constructive and critical feedback and that probably applies to various mmorpg guilds already running in mmorpgs/sandboxes/RP etc that GW's probably will find very helpful, if some of those also are invited.

Either way, the best start can only help the development of the game as it releases in an early state.

Goblin Squad Member

Its a no win situation.

When SW:TOR launched they did a staggered start and the backlash was huge. And the delay between the first people in and the last people in was only a few days. PfO is talkinng about months between waves.

Everyone understands why its the right thing to do until they are the one that can't play with their friends for 6 months. Then the nerd-hulk-rage takes over.

Goblin Squad Member

Rafkin wrote:

Its a no win situation.

When SW:TOR launched they did a staggered start and the backlash was huge. And the delay between the first people in and the last people in was only a few days. PfO is talkinng about months between waves.

Everyone understands why its the right thing to do until they are the one that can't play with their friends for 6 months. Then the nerd-hulk-rage takes over.

To be fair SW:TOR had a completely different economic model, and were aiming for a large launch followed by an increase in subscription base beyond that. EA did not see the end result as a financial success. The economic model is refurbished for a F2P model and a massive cut in positions take place.

None of that happened due to the initial delay during launch week. TOR did not meet its initial goals because of the content of the game, not the staggered launch.

I think its safe to say most of the angry forum community that raged over waiting a couple of days still ended up eagerly playing when their time came up. Nerd Rage is a bad measuring tool for failure or success.

Goblin Squad Member

Rafkin wrote:

Its a no win situation.

When SW:TOR launched they did a staggered start and the backlash was huge. And the delay between the first people in and the last people in was only a few days. PfO is talkinng about months between waves.

Everyone understands why its the right thing to do until they are the one that can't play with their friends for 6 months. Then the nerd-hulk-rage takes over.

I think that is a bogus comparison.

SW:TOR had huge amount of publicity and phenomenal interest and years of development to hype people up (as well as mainstream themepark). PfO is hardly featured at any games sites. It's going to be a 1yr dev and an early release with limited content - nothing exceptionally flash. Second, goblin squad and certain guilds will be invited initially, so that's already expected for the 1st few months. I'm sure the devs will offer further opportunities between then and now (assuming it secures investment) & guess the way the game will gather interest is word of mouth from players suggesting it has potential and will be a better game as more features slowly are added.

To be sure, I think plenty of players won't be interested in the early state, apart from oc the usual "new/next wow-killer!" lol. :p

Goblin Squad Member

Scarlette wrote:
...When they need bad guys, they give invites to "Tony's" (Blaeringr or Nihimon or whichever) and they come into play.

I lol'd.

Goblin Squad Member

All true. I was just using TOR as an example showing that even though people understand the need and benefits for a staggered launch, all that goes out the window when they are the ones that can't play.

Personally the big draw for me is helping my guild or the general community build something and if I miss out on the first few months of that it would be a big downer.

Does a sandbox game still have the same draw after everything is built?

Goblin Squad Member

Rafkin wrote:

All true. I was just using TOR as an example showing that even though people understand the need and benefits for a staggered launch, all that goes out the window when they are the ones that can't play.

Personally the big draw for me is helping my guild or the general community build something and if I miss out on the first few months of that it would be a big downer.

Does a sandbox game still have the same draw after everything is built?

Thats the rub, at least in games with open meaningful pvp, there is no time when everything is built. Structures and influences rise and fall, giving way to the new, or then allowing the old to rebuild.

Goblin Squad Member

The settlements won't be in for the 1st 7 months I think it's been mentioned already.

I think the idea is that the more that is done off the back of the initial players in-game (as well as reinvestment by GWs) the more is possible for new players as new content is delivered and players start growing their communities and build their influence across the game world. I guess the pay-off is longer training time, for early players for their time of more limited gameplay and growth of influence. But those churn stats Ryan mentioned around 30% suggests plenty of players will try PfO and then move on so the early game won't suit everyone that gets in those 1st 7 months.

51 to 79 of 79 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Licensed Products / Digital Games / Pathfinder Online / What happens if you don't get in on the first 4500? nor the next 4500? nor the next 4500?? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Pathfinder Online