Goblinworks Blog: Begin the Beguine


Pathfinder Online

1 to 50 of 174 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

Added thread for new Goblinworks Blog: Begin the Beguine.

Goblin Squad Member

Bing Crosby - Begin the Beguine

Goblin Squad Member

a good song.

Goblin Squad Member

It sounds like an interesting plan and different than just the usual players as lab rats kind of development.

Goblin Squad Member

Notmyrealname wrote:
It sounds like an interesting plan and different than just the usual players as lab rats kind of development.

lol, actually that might be a good name for the "Emergent Development" name tag that is being discussed in the previous blog of "Slipping": "Lab Lions Development"?! Although "whack the goblin" might just do, I thought

Goblin Works Blog wrote:
...we've had a very detailed game design document that represents our vision for Pathfinder Online.

Some of this will be in the Thornkeep Book?

Silver Crusade Goblin Squad Member

Looks like all sorts of fun is headed our way! Can't wait!

Goblin Squad Member

Are we talking like a 1/6th fraction? or a 8/9ths fraction?(for development time)


This is exciting... and it makes me even more excited for next week's blog post that will hash out the details. Not a TON to discuss here, since most of it will be clarified then.

Valkenr wrote:
Are we talking like a 1/6th fraction? or a 8/9ths fraction?(for development time)

Speculation is dangerous territory, and would be easier to do after next blog post, but I'll just avoid speculation and work off what we've been given:

Ryan Dancey wrote:

On release, Pathfinder Online will have a small but very usable set of features, implemented in a minimally developed state. Content features will also be delivered in a basic state.

...
"[designing systems rather than content] allows us to speed up the release dramatically. But it also means that we'll have a fairly small space ready for the players to experience,"

Dramatically sped up release compared to AAA MMOs. I was trying to put a fraction on that, but I can't.

That being said:

Spoiler:
My completely groundless guess is sometime in 2014. This is about as groundless as my guess that my cat has a million hairs on it. *researches that cats have ~30-50 million hairs*. So I could be off by an order of 50. So sometime between next blog post and the 22nd century.

Goblin Squad Member

I'm going to go out on limb here and say we will see the initial release in mid 2013. I may seriously revise that after seeing the tech demo, but it sounds to me like the game we are going to see at the start is going to be VERY bare bones, and that GoblinWorks really wants to get some players into the mix ASAP to start giving them feedback.

I'm thinking they are going to throw put out the basic races and classes, get a few essential items out and establish the skeleton of a marketing and crafting system, then release it to us.

As long as there enough of a combat system for entertaining PVP, and a crafting/trade system worth using people can start to enjoy themselves and roleplaying. Hell scratch that, a crafting system isn't even essential from the start.

For those who say it takes more. I say look at Freelancer. I played it for 5 years. Look at how many people STILL play it. That game offers three things. Combat, trades, and exploration. I spent literally hundreds of hours on it. You know why? I was part of the community. I was caught up in the role I played in that game. I spent hundreds... maybe even thousands of hours being GL_AndiusTheGreat on a single player game that had multiplayer thrown in as an afterthought. No crafting system, a mining system that wasn't even profitable, no territory control, a grind that could be finished in under 4 hours without outside help and about 10 minutes with it, and really... nothing going for it other than a great combat system and and a lively community where anything could happen.

Since then I've spent my days gaming wishing I was having half as much fun as I did on Freelancer. No Pathfinder doesn't need much to make it worth playing for me at least. Just the promise of what is to come and people to interact with.

Lantern Lodge

Hopefully I'll have computer and internet needed to play it by then. But I will certainly want plenty of PvE. PvP is alright but I always liked exploring dungeons and stuff. Hopefully they won't have invisible walls, cause I hate those a lot!

Goblin Squad Member

Beguine, noun. Female member of a 13th- and 14th-century French lay religious movement, usually expressed by joining a convent under temporary vows that expire after a define period of time.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

You know I just had an idea on how they could get the game out faster. Scrap archetypes in the beginning. Not forever but just while they get things started. Honestly.

Heres the deal. If capstones require you to stick with the same class until you reach it... every single basic class needs to be in at release. Otherwise you are kind of shafting anyone who wants to play a class other than what is available at release. You are still putting any classes that don't come in release behind the curve if you don't have all the core classes from the start.

But what if we all start as a peasant class? Put a few weapons and spells into the game that we can play around with until we pick our class upon their release. That would allow us to hop into the game, try out the combat system, start establishing a community and a market, etc.

I think it would be kind of fun to have a month or two of running around and fight wolves and goblins with pitchforks and hunting knives, pick out places to build when construction is added, and maybe mess around with a crafting skill or two as more items and crafting skills are added into the game. Then after that month or two or maybe even three is up, we can stop fighting with pitchforks and slings, and start learning our real class. Or maybe just keep crafting and trading if that is what we enjoy.

Goblin Squad Member

Considering it'll supposedly take upwards of two years to reach capstone, I'm not sure a few months are really going to make a difference. Someone could pick up a new class 3-4 months after launch and still hit it before many of the people who played day one.

I'm all for getting the game out soon, but if it's too scaled down, it'll be difficult to generate much of a buzz and interest others in it. Part of the thought behind the staggered release is to build a community and share it with outsiders, getting them excited about joining up. While I'm sure I'd enjoy running around killing rats for a week with my pointy stick, I'll have a tough time convincing my friends to give it a go.

Sovereign Court Goblin Squad Member

Personally I like the smaller and more frequent update strategy then nothing for months and months or pushing expensive expansions. Isn't that why Asheron's Call is still a working MMO after all? Something new every month of the game.

I'm still very excited for this game.

Lantern Lodge

Hey, that pointy stick is dangerous, you could poke your eye out. ;)

I personally agree with both of the above. They shouldn't launch to soon or small and they should go for smaller more regular updates.

As for archtypes, all they need for that is to allow you to take multiple different options and still remain in your class, no need to specifically state out the different archtypes, thus the options can simply be added later and you wouldn't need to start over.

The only thing that concerns me is the lack of progress between things. DDO countered this with minor abilities gained every 1/5 of each level, and was about right at lower levels but started taking forever as you went up. But how do they plan to to make that last level not feel like you are playing unchanged for months?

Goblin Squad Member

Mcduff wrote:

Considering it'll supposedly take upwards of two years to reach capstone, I'm not sure a few months are really going to make a difference. Someone could pick up a new class 3-4 months after launch and still hit it before many of the people who played day one.

I'm all for getting the game out soon, but if it's too scaled down, it'll be difficult to generate much of a buzz and interest others in it. Part of the thought behind the staggered release is to build a community and share it with outsiders, getting them excited about joining up. While I'm sure I'd enjoy running around killing rats for a week with my pointy stick, I'll have a tough time convincing my friends to give it a go.

Sure 2-3 years down the road it won't be a big deal. But it will be a VERY big deal toward the start of the game.

And you know I don't think this game could fail to set itself apart in the first few months without classes. Personally I would say go at it this way:

Start the game with no classes and basic weapons. Have at least 3 types of armor and 5 kinds of weapons. Lets say wool, fur, and iron chainmail for sets of armor. A pitchfork(polearm), a hunting knife(dagger), a sling(ranged), a walking stick(staff for magic users or just a quarterstaff), and a torch(one handed melee... plus you need them if you have pitchforks). That is actually going to give the game a very fun sort of role-play feel to it. I'm already kind of sitting here thinking about how fun that sounds to go out exploring with that kind of gear.

Now add some crafting skills. I would start with basic gathering skills. Woodcutting, herb gathering, mining, (At this point I would use the node system with the intention of turning those nodes into mine entrances for one of the other two systems later on.) etc.

Then create a need for resources both from combat and those crafting skills. So probably a hunger system, item decay, and a few things to purchase from the NPCs in town such as healing kits, a sleep bonus for staying in the inn (This is also a great way to get people to start interacting), and donkeys for hauling materials that will require their own food, and might get killed so you would need a replacement. Make it so if you want fur armor you trade wolf fur for it, iron chainmail, iron ore, walking stick, wood, healing kit, herbs. You can easily remove those vendors later on once crafting is implemented.

Now you have things to fight with, an economy with a reason to trade, player interaction. All you really need at this point goals for players to work for. I think this should actually be pretty simple. Make some control points around the world, and make it so there is a reward for whatever company holds them like say, gems that can be used with a vendor to get them to put enchantments on items for you. You get 5 gems an hour, and it takes 3 gems to enchant everything except for weapons and your torso slot which take 5. They don't have to be great enchants just something that makes your gear a bit better. This is a feature that would be removed once there is real territory control anyway.

And put Ryan's formations into the game...

You now have people expending time and resources on fighting over control points. You have an economy that will allow for those people to acquire gear to fuel that fight, thereby supporting hunters and crafters. You have a unique system that has never been seen before in any other MMO, and you have the promise of amazing features yet to come in the not so distant future.

Are you telling me that at that point you couldn't go to your friend and say, "Wow, look at these cool features and cool ideas they have. You should join in on the next wave when they add classes to the game!" and spark some interest?

No I would have fun. I would have even more fun as they expanded the crafting system and items available during those few months, and I would have a ton of fun when they released all of the classes a bit down the road.

I'm picturing a battle between a bunch of peasants using the armor and weapons I described right now and it sounds like a blast.

Goblin Squad Member

Morgen wrote:

Personally I like the smaller and more frequent update strategy then nothing for months and months or pushing expensive expansions. Isn't that why Asheron's Call is still a working MMO after all? Something new every month of the game.

I'm still very excited for this game.

DCUO tried to do small frequent updates. Leading the community(never made promises, just suggestions, good legal team after SWG:NGE) to believe that the F2P title they dubbed subscription, was going to see $15 worth of update content every month. Month 1 went buy, valentines day came and went, late February we saw a valentines event that lasted until ST. Patrick's day, wait, no it was some time in April that we saw the next patch, ahh... well lets throw an april fools theme in with Mxyzptlk, oh wait April fools was last week. Oh $!%# were running out of money and there's only one populated server! lets put out a paid update(Lantern powerset) and see if anyone catches us, we can always make it free for all subscribers a month later.

5 months 2 patches

...SOE is temporarily out of service. you will be notified when service can be returned...

*sends a mental hi-five to the guy that poked a hole in SOE's archaic security system*

*Insert well written letter explaining the situation in a way that doesn't make the company look like a bunch of idiots*

*receive new credit card in the mail*

Well, we've been unplugged for a month in a half, lets give everyone a load of free stuff so they won't leave, then put out an announcement saying we plan to go free to play and will merge all the servers onto one.

...cancel subscription. Reason for leaving: Incompetence

My time line may be a little bit off, and some things may be jumbled around, but I was laughing more than I was concerned for SOE.

Small frequent patching sounds good now, but in practice in this market is has proven to be very risky. GW will have a small audience to start, this means two things, less input and less chances that bugs will be found. More time will need to be put into each patch than usual, unless they spend 90% of the pre-[insert new launch title] making a super easy to use tool box for adding content. They won't have to deal with a approval service, so it won't get throttled like DCUO did with PSN, but frequent patching is very risky. I hope GW finds a way to minimize the risk, but I'm not putting any faith in a frequent patching system until I see it in practice. It would need to be so simple, I could start a job at GW with no formal training, and be able to produce game content and institute balance changes within a week on on-the-job training.

Goblin Squad Member

In terms of archtypes, I think they should have the basic ones implimented but probably only out to about Level 2-3 or so. They also don't need a ton of skills/Merit Badges created, just some of the basic ones that involve some basic class functionality.

This gives players the opportunity to TEST how some of the core systems like combat (PvE & PvP), looting, Magic and the Advancement system work.

There is no point in opening up the game for players if there isn't some basic systems in place for them to TEST. I think alot of the rest of the game they want to build is dependant upon those basic systems being there. Plus having the Skills system in place along with some basic advancement will give them the opportunity to generate a little revenue to keep funding further development as it sounds like skill learning time is going to be the primary driver of thier revenue stream. Stuff that can wait till later...

- Crafting (although this should be in one of the earliest updates)
- The Contract System
- The Alignment/Reputation System
- Chartered Companies/Settlments/Kingdoms
- Proceduraly Generated Dungeons/Wandering Monsters
- Sophisticated MOB AI
- Construction/Player Owned Buildings
- Mass Combat/Warfare/Conquest

All that stuff is cool, but it seems to me it's layered on top of and dependant upon the more basic systems...thus it makes sense to wait and make sure the basic systems have been playtested and are working (in a general sense)the way GW intends them to and are well recieved by the players. YMMV.

Goblin Squad Member

I have serious doubts about the wisdom of putting off:

  • Crafting;
  • Contracts;
  • Alignment/Reputation;
  • Chartered Companies;
  • Unit Cohesion.

I think those are all fundamental, and therefore need to be part of the foundation.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

@Valkenr,

I didn't play DCUO but I think the key here is setting up the correct expectations from the start. GW has been very direct and blunt that what we are getting at start is essentialy a "Living Playtest" (someone suggested that term in the other thread about naming for this development model and I really liked it). So I think the initial player base is going to be pretty clear in thier expectations about what they are getting and what they aren't getting. Not sure if that was really the case with DCUO, sounds more like they were setting up expectations they couldn't meet and that became the problem.

What I look at what we are really paying for initialy is participation in the process of building and shaping the full game that we eventualy will get... rather then getting a full featured/robust game initialy.

I'll also take my opportunity to make my pitch once more for Live Events. One of the things GW can do during this initial period, if feature updates are dragging out longer then expected (which we ALL understand can happen in the Development Process) and player interest starts to lag because there aren't that many systems or functional areas to interact with is to have some staff who aren't involved directly in Development (like Community or PR people) jump into NPC's, generate some mobs and run a few simple Live Events/RP Scenarios/Mini Story Arcs. This can help keep player interest up during this initial period, as it means there will actualy be something going on in the world to interact with. Given the fact that the initial player base will be small it should be doable as well.

Note that if Updates ARE proceeding at a good pace and the players are having plenty of stuff to interact with as well as us keeping each other interested with interaction then it's probably not neccesary and might be too much of distraction even for non-development staff. However, I think it could be a good thing for GW to keep in thier back pocket as a plan B, in case updates are dragging out longer then they expected and players don't have enough interesting things to interact with.

In fact, I think those of us that are avid RP-ers (I know I'm one) should maybe pro-actively give GW a hand in this regard...and maybe get together and try to figure out how to run some mini-story's of our own to keep our fellow players interested. Again...only if it turns out there isn't enough in place to interact with in order to keep up with interest...and updates aren't frequent enough for us to be occupied with testing out stuff and providing feedback. Thoughts?

P.S. Ryan, would the suggestion in the above paragraph run contrary to what GW wants from players for the intial period? I know the initial period is primarly about us testing out systems and providing usefull feedback on them...I'm just thinking about what happens if our ability to do so runs ahead of GW's ability to put features/systems in the game to interact with and things start to get stale? Or maybe I'm making some bad assumptions here? I was assuming that alot of the systems that facilitate more interesting/in-depth player interaction (eg "Kingdom Building", full blown Player Economy) might not be in place initialy?

Goblin Squad Member

This is my model:

List of Runescape updates

(for those of you who don't know it, Runescape is the 2nd largest western MMO. It has over 5 million players and over 1 million subscribers)

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

@GrumpyMel - what you are describing (I think) is what I would call "just playing the game as intended".

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Runescape was my first real MMO and it really has changed a TON over the years, and with the exception of the transition from Runescape Classic to the current version that was originally dubbed Runescape 2, it has all been small changed. New quest here. New item there. New skill every once in awhile. Graphical update to this region. Audio update to this quest. etc.

Not a bad model except that it seems Runescape's original concept really puts some limitations on what is possible and not possible in that game. That would be my cautioning to GW. Make sure the systems you put in at the start are ones from which you can grow more detailed systems, or else ones that are easily removed as better systems emerge.

As to someone saying we should start with the basics and make sure those work before we put in more detailed systems. I fully agree, which is a huge argument in favor of starting us as peasants IMO. There are 11 core classes. I'm talking the standards here, the classes found in the core rulebook, nothing fancy like oracles or alchemists. Those 11 classes need items made for them, abilities made, and they all need to be balanced.

Now the combat system needs to be tested. Formations need to be tested. Equipment needs to be tested. Any existing elements of the crafting system and NPC interaction needs to be tested.

Basically my idea is going to allow players into the game with all the basics, and enough systems to have fun. It's not going to have them testing 11 different archetypes all at the same time, or letting one small set of archetypes get ahead. Something tells me people that don't mind releasing only a couple of them to begin with aren't too worried about things like, not being able to get their capstone ability in the class they want because it isn't released with the first few archetypes, because they know they are going to play something basic like a fighter or a cleric. How would you feel if the first classes to make it in are bards and monks? And they get a 2-3 month head start on the other archetypes, and dominate the combat scene for awhile because of the people who don't take levels in them so they will be able to get their capstone in their chosen class?

Lets test the basics. Give peasants melee weapons, ranged weapons, and spells, and let us test it. There is absolutely no good reason to give anyone classes before every class is ready. You don't need classes to have crafting, combat, PVP, formations... really most of the content in the game is not dependant on archetypes. You can have most people play a class they don't want to be playing, put a sour taste in a lot of people mouths, and give a few people an unfair advantage. Or you can have everyone play a peasant and let people have fun with it because they know they are on par with everyone else.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Andius- you are discussing the in-house development cycle. At that point there won't even be 3d models for everything- you should expect to see cubes with the word 'goblin' written on their sides, not goblins.

Goblin Squad Member

Um... no. Actually I'm guessing that if I played what little there is of PFO right now the goblins would look like this.

I am not talking about the in-house development cycle. I'm talking about them releasing a game to us that is less than what most people expect, so they can get the community involved in the feedback and suggestion process as quickly as possible. Seeing the progress they have already made on modeling I think it could be done by mid 2013.

I hate to be rude but if someone is going to tell me what I'm talking about is not practical, I would prefer it be someone actually involved in the development process.

Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:

I have serious doubts about the wisdom of putting off:

  • Crafting;
  • Contracts;
  • Alignment/Reputation;
  • Chartered Companies;
  • Unit Cohesion.

I think those are all fundamental, and therefore need to be part of the foundation.

I could see unit cohesion as something that could survive a delay on (namely due to most of the implications of unit combat seem to me to be more about warfare, which is likely going to be a role for settlements.

Absolute agreement the others.

Especially crafting... Pretty much every implication of the game via Ryan has pretty much every part of the game, revolves around crafted gear. Completed gear isn't probable to be dropped by enemies... harvesting kind of lacks any meaning without crafting, which also negates transport. No transport or harvesting, means pretty much no banditry, no banditry means no good vs evil PCs.

You take out the crafting/manufacturing you cripple the game... One of the earliest blogs was all about interdependence. The Butchers, bakers and candlestick makers blog pretty much was all about interdependence of harvesters (which also includes adventurers collecting loot from monsters or even other players), crafters, and material processing. If things are interdependent, they kind of have to be added at the same time.

Goblin Squad Member

@Onishi, you're probably right about Unit Cohesion being something that could be put off for a bit.

Goblin Squad Member

I like the idea of peasant, but equipement and the economy system must be ready.

Also, ability score and some skill should be available.

After that, you start contract.

Then, chartered companies.

At each update, you add monsters and new crafts.

After this basic, you will have a lot of time to construct alignement/reputation, classes,animal compagnion, settlement and player nation.


I agree 100% with Onishi/Nihimon/Brutus. (also, my stated estimate was a little conservative, for the sake of my own sanity, my heart agrees with Andius)

In addition, putting in semi-playable placeholder systems doesn't make much sense, it's a waste of development resources, unless the plan is to kick something out the door ASAP. It's also a waste of players' time to have them evaluate a system that is going to be radically changed because it isn't what anybody thinks is right, merely what can be done the fastest.

That being said, I for one wouldn't mind monster placeholders of generically animated generic wireframe bipeds/quadrupeds, painted a single color, that said "goblin" or "deer" or "storm giant" above their heads.

Goblin Squad Member

Waffleyone wrote:

In addition, putting in semi-playable placeholder systems doesn't make much sense, it's a waste of development resources, unless the plan is to kick something out the door ASAP. It's also a waste of players' time to have them evaluate a system that is going to be radically changed because it isn't what anybody thinks is right, merely what can be done the fastest.

Agreed. As much fun as it sounds, it would be just one more thing to invest resources in for the dev team and probably wouldn't translate well into the actual game for the players. There seems little point in reporting a bug for my "gardenhoe attack" animation when no one will be using it in 2-3 months.

Waffleyone wrote:


That being said, I for one wouldn't mind monster placeholders of generically animated generic wireframe bipeds/quadrupeds, painted a single color, that said "goblin" or "deer" or "storm giant" above their heads.

So Minecraft then?

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mcduff wrote:
Waffleyone wrote:

In addition, putting in semi-playable placeholder systems doesn't make much sense, it's a waste of development resources, unless the plan is to kick something out the door ASAP. It's also a waste of players' time to have them evaluate a system that is going to be radically changed because it isn't what anybody thinks is right, merely what can be done the fastest.

Agreed. As much fun as it sounds, it would be just one more thing to invest resources in for the dev team and probably wouldn't translate well into the actual game for the players. There seems little point in reporting a bug for my "gardenhoe attack" animation when no one will be using it in 2-3 months.

The point is you make systems that A. Take little effort. B. Translate into more permanent systems well.

So yeah, building an animation for a pitchfork attack may seem like a waste of time. But what if that pitchfork attack is actually using the standard animation for spears, halberds, or quarterstaffs? What if that torch uses the animation used by 1 handed hammers and clubs? What if that hunting knife uses the animation used by daggers? And what if slings remain in the game for useage by actual classes? How useless are those animations now?

Sure, they may be setting up vendors that will be removed later on. But do you think this game won't have other vendors later on? It may set up a class that MAY not be used in the future (Then again I can see value to letting people play the game awhile before picking their class. I could even see some crafters and merchants never giving up the peasant class for roleplay reasons.) But honestly how long will it take to set up a class that has almost no abilities?

Sure they may set up a couple control points that will be replaced when territory control becomes more serious, but do you think that the code required for that control point will be very extensive, and that it won't be handy to have it when they are determining how to take control of a fort or settlement?

Do you think rangers and barbarians will have no use for fur armor? That druids and bards will have no use for wool? That fighters and paladins will have no use for iron chainmail?

Go back through everything I proposed and ask yourself. "How much of this is really wasted development time?" I would say less than 5% of it.

Goblin Squad Member

Like I said Andius, personally I'd enjoy it. Especially if it meant getting to play that much sooner. If it can be done without using allot of time and resources, I think it sounds like a blast.

I guess my concern is that you may be underestimating the amount of time this would take. I'm certainly not an authority on the subject, but if I had to guess, I'd say even implementing these basic functions would take allot of effort. I could absolutely be wrong though. If someone else who's more experienced in programming and design would care to weigh in, I'll happily take their word for it.

Sovereign Court Goblin Squad Member

I'm curious if we'll get some kind of benefit from running events or something, if that's the road they want to go down. I can RP things going on, we used to do that all the time in Ultima Online. If that is supported it'd be pretty cool.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

@Andius
I like the idea of playing peasant type characters as a way of helping to iron-out/play test the various systems. To save on resources it could be done in a remote small community. This way we could trial the varius parts of the system as it was implemented. It would certainly make a novel approach for beta testing.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

I'm not sure if you're discussing something that's closer to 90% feature complete, or something that's close to 10% feature complete... On the one hand, you imply that the art cycle will be near enough to complete for animations to be used. On the other hand, you imply that the core gameplay design will be just starting to develop.

How close to a complete game were you visualizing this might be?


@andius: I'm sorry, I did not mean to offend. The content that you proposed is solid (The things which you defended in your post), however the systems are still placeholders compared to the goal (rather than basic frameworks) that shouldn't make it out of development cycles.

What I apparently forgot to say, is that its worth waiting for something that is fairly complete although basic. Release too early within the development cycle and you present too many rough edges and too little content, which alienates people and gives a poor impression. The only reason to release that early is because some players want to start playing sooner, and it's unwise to design around impatience (I don't want to wait either =P)

Foregoing classes temporarily in favor of peasants is a valid placeholder, I should add. I'm not crazy about it (I don't think its wrong), and it concerns me in this way: i've observed that one of the biggest appeals of modern RPGs is that they 'feel awesome'. Playing a peasant is going directly in the face of that, which is dangerous because it could alienate people.

@mcduff: generic != hideous hahaha

Goblin Squad Member

DeciusBrutus wrote:

I'm not sure if you're discussing something that's closer to 90% feature complete, or something that's close to 10% feature complete... On the one hand, you imply that the art cycle will be near enough to complete for animations to be used. On the other hand, you imply that the core gameplay design will be just starting to develop.

How close to a complete game were you visualizing this might be?

I'm suggesting the prioritise features in a way that the most essential features needed to release the game are that which are developed first. Well... actually I'm not suggesting that, that is what they are saying they are going to to.

I am simply saying classes, should be put on the backburner for other more essential systems. I do not think classes are a core feature needed to enjoy the game, nor is a fully developed crafting system.

Also, I'd like to quote from the blog:

GW Blog wrote:
We are in the final stages of polishing the Technology Demo. The team is implementing the basic combat system (not the actual system for the released game, just a simple "whack the goblin" implementation to show off animation and particle effects) and a basic UI. We've also implemented an invisible flying character that we'll use to make video captures from inside the client.

Animations are not only something that I think are crucial at launch. They are something that apparently are already being created. As are models given we know that if one thing in this game will have a model... it's the goblins.

Let's be honest. What is going to drum up more excitement and buzz about this MMO. Some people telling their friends about about how cool the well developed classes, and super territory control/crafting system/city building systems are and posting it on forums while all they can show are pink cubes that say "wolf" and "house" over the top. Or some actual footage and screenshots of a bunch of peasants going at it over control points, with decent graphics, audio, character models, etc.

Like it or not our society is shallow. Scratch that, our species is shallow. It's not just Americans, look at Korean MMOs. People like to see some cool footage, and honestly, I'm no graphics whore (I've played Wurm Online for crying out loud) but I do like to be immersed in my game and a game where I silently fight colored geometric objects is not going to cut it.

I think Pathfinder Online will be able to sell itself a lot easier when we can say. "Look at this cool footage of Pathfinder Online, here are all the amazing plans they have for it!" Than if it were to release with us saying "Listen to all these cool features it has! Don't worry about the graphics, they'll get better at some point..."

Both are important. Both are very important. But the features and systems are the cart. And the graphics, audio, and everything that looks cool in a flashy trailer, are the horse. I'm sure you know what I mean without me having to drag out the old saying.

You may think this is a matter of opinion, but I'm telling you, regardless of your entitlement to your opinion, I think we both know what is going to sell.

Waffleyone wrote:

@andius: I'm sorry, I did not mean to offend. The content that you proposed is solid (The things which you defended in your post), however the systems are still placeholders compared to the goal (rather than basic frameworks) that shouldn't make it out of development cycles.

What I apparently forgot to say, is that its worth waiting for something that is fairly complete although basic. Release too early within the development cycle and you present too many rough edges and too little content, which alienates people and gives a poor impression. The only reason to release that early is because some players want to start playing sooner, and it's unwise to design around impatience (I don't want to wait either =P)

Foregoing classes temporarily in favor of peasants is a valid placeholder, I should add. I'm not crazy about it (I don't think its wrong), and it concerns me in this way: i've observed that one of the biggest appeals of modern RPGs is that they 'feel awesome'. Playing a peasant is going directly in the face of that, which is dangerous because it could alienate people.

@mcduff: generic != hideous hahaha

I'm not really offended I just was frustrated because I felt people were making obstacles where there were none.

I understand where you are coming from now, but I don't think your vision is in line with what GoblinWorks is planning for this game.

Goblinworks is releasing this game to a limited audience at first. A limited audience with full understanding that this is a bare bones release, and who understand that the developers are going to be taking our feedback to heart in how they move forward from that point.

Maybe a good name for the initial launch would be the Fanboy Release. This audience is not going to be the harshest critics, and the game simply will not be available to every idiot that is there on the launch day or even the beta of some of the AAA titles.

I personally feel like adding the peasant class, and making them look and feel like peasants will be something a lot of audience is going to identify with and appreciate. Think about how your character looks when you start out in most games. You don't pop into LOTRO and ride down a troll on your shining steed. You don't pop into TOR and fight Darth Malgus as a full fledged jedi master. You don't pop into WoW and fight the Litch King or whatever the newest big bad guy is in top end raid gear. Hell, Luke starts of A New Hope as a moisture farmer. Rand Al'Thor starts of The Eye of The World as shepard. Neo starts out the Matrix as some programer hooked into the system. Even Bruce Wayne who was born into wealth and power had to be torn down to the level of a peasant before he became Batman.

All games start you out with humble beginnings. Without them your character rising to the top is not nearly as rewarding. People like and identify with figures that have to work to achieve their power. It's an ingrained part of our society. This is PFO's humble beginnings. We start off new characters, in a new game, as peasants, who go exploring, or trading, or fighting in a militia. Later on, we will grow in power to be something much, much more as that is released and our characters develop enough to reach those goals.

Why don't you think people will be able to identify with that?


I know you're looking for a fanboy release; I don't think it's a good idea. I don't think it's GWs plan either. I've been trying to defend GW's plan as OPPOSED to your proposed fanboy release.

Starting with humble beginnings is fine, just get me into the action quickly (i love dark souls, where you're just another shambling corpse waiting to be slaughtered like all the other shambling corpses, and you're about as likely to die). If the first third of those stories were farming/shepherding/programming all of them would have lost most of their audience and been written off as 'almost good' (except WoT *gags*). I have personally observed that a lot of the short term enjoyment my friends get out of RPGs is some animation or particle effect or SOMETHING that makes them feel awesome, and I think being forced to be a peasant may turn them off.

You are hitting me with ridiculous hyperbole and assuming I'm unreasonable, and I'm not going to continue to try to have a discussion with someone who is trying to win.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Waffleyone wrote:
If the first third of those stories were farming/shepherding/programming all of them would have lost most of their audience and been written off as 'almost good' (except WoT *gags*). I have personally observed that a lot of the short term enjoyment my friends get out of RPGs is some animation or particle effect or SOMETHING that makes them feel awesome, and I think being forced to be a peasant may turn them off.

Then a game that takes 2.5 years to reach capstone may not be for them. Sandboxes simply do not appeal to the immediate gratification, or even relatively quick gratification audience.

Goblin Squad Member

There's another angle to this that makes me agree with Andius' suggestion from small but playable beginnings:

If player interaction & emergent content is the core of the game as long as you have a small world where the small initial founder population get to work with the social rules, that's gonna be fun/memorable start to building the game just as much as new content delivery periodically adding to the game. I think there's something to be said for starting chars at a basic level and testing that out and feed back to devs... Especially in an environment where players are NOT FROM transient and anonymous and huge population pool. If this forum was a lot bigger with a wider variance of people posting it would be easy for the level of discussion to reduce in quality substantially, as happens elsewhere all over the Internet. Speaking of particle effects, this made me laugh recently: Imgur: My Main Beef With MMO PvP

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

There seems to be an assumption that the game will still need to be tested when it releases, that will all be done in beta.The first year after release is a time of feedback based developement not a time of testing game features. It will be a functioning MMO at release with some character classes ,not a game that needs to have its "at release" features tested.When new content and features are added it had better be fully tested first or the game will review like a sinking ship.

Goblin Squad Member

Notmyrealname wrote:
There seems to be an assumption that the game will still need to be tested when it releases, that will all be done in beta.The first year after release is a time of feedback based developement not a time of testing game features. It will be a functioning MMO at release with some character classes ,not a game that needs to have its "at release" features tested.When new content and features are added it had better be fully tested first or the game will review like a sinking ship.

Agree, possible what Andius is suggesting, a bit like minecraft alpha, as long as you have some basic elements and the ability to "find" new materials/things to do to combine them then add the social element, it'll be really interesting because these early things will lead to longer-term goals as more content is added; especially setting up of social contracts/who's-who etc, I'd have thought? You don't need to be a dragon-slayer straight out of the gate.

I think, Ryan already said they'll run a fast internal beta and then a playable initial release with a lot of "stubs"? That said, the feedback likely will be wide ranging (include a bit of QA) seeing as players are much more directly the people who can say what emphasis of dev should be?

Goblin Squad Member

AvenaOats wrote:

There's another angle to this that makes me agree with Andius' suggestion from small but playable beginnings:

If player interaction & emergent content is the core of the game as long as you have a small world where the small initial founder population get to work with the social rules, that's gonna be fun/memorable start to building the game just as much as new content delivery periodically adding to the game. I think there's something to be said for starting chars at a basic level and testing that out and feed back to devs... Especially in an environment where players are NOT FROM transient and anonymous and huge population pool. If this forum was a lot bigger with a wider variance of people posting it would be easy for the level of discussion to reduce in quality substantially, as happens elsewhere all over the Internet. Speaking of particle effects, this made me laugh recently: Imgur: My Main Beef With MMO PvP

I think you see a large part of what I am getting at. I'm suggesting these ideas mostly, because in all honesty... it sounds like something that I would really hate to miss the chance to take part in it.

You hear about things sometimes. The humble start of now larger games. When EVE was just frigates. When there were no veterans in Darkfall.

The launch of a new sandbox is a time without many features, and probably it's fair share of bugs, but it's also a time when everyone comes to the table with the same stuff, and work together or compete with the same abilities which are simple to learn because there aren't many. It's a game you can just pick up and jump straight into the action. Sometimes it feels like we gain as much as we lose when these game's advance. That people have their eyes and minds so set on what is to come, that they don't appreciate what they already have.

Maybe my opinion will change if I try it. But honestly I could see myself crossing my fingers hoping it's a while before classes to come out as long as I had things to do as a peasant. I think there would be a lot of stories to tell of evenings in the tavern, battles fought with slings and pitch forks, and adventures had while exploring the brand new map. And since it's launch, those stories will ingrain themselves into the epic tale of Pathfinder Online's history both outside the game, and inside the game's roleplay. People will be able to say they fought in peasant uprisings or militias. There will be wars with names, and people who's names become almost as large.

If someone feels thats going to be boring well... I'm sure there are others that might jump at the chance to take part in it, and there are only limited numbers so why not sit the first round out?

Goblin Squad Member

Some points....

- Starting Characters are NOT "peasants" in pretty much every RPG system I've seen. They are fully capable, trained proffesionals in thier respective proffesions that have little to no actual field experience. "Peasant" also entails a specific socio-economic class which is going to kill RP for some people. I don't think PFO will be well served by going the route that some SPRPG's go by defining/restricting players to a specific background for thier class. YMMV.

- In my suggestions, I'm trying to put on my "Developer" thinking cap as best I can. Generaly speaking animation/art/graphics is a seperate cycle performed by a seperate team from the game/application logic so my attitude there is kinda whatever gets done to make it in gets done and what doesn't, doesn't. It's the game/application logic that's the critical part as far as I'm concerned... and what I really try to look for there is dependancies and core systems that the game relies on. So when I make suggestions about what I think should be in the initial release it's (mostly) based on things at the lowest level of the dependancy tier (e.g. things that everything else depends on), things at higher levels can be safely excised and added in later.

On those lines, I assume (though I could be wrong) that starting players will have some method of obtaining the very most basic, low end gear from NPC merchants rather then crafters (i.e. it's bought whole, off the rack). If not, I think you are actualy going to have a problem with new players getting started. On the other hand, crafting (at least certain types of it) is going to be dependant on materials harvested from "mobs". To that end, in my view, crafting though a very important element of the game CAN be safely excised and have the game function for a bit, combat can't. Because combat is going to need to be in (because it STARTS the whole economic feedback loop) and players are going to need to be effective enough in combat to defeat those critters, that probably means they probably have to be able to access a few basic abilities which also means the skills/merit badge system should be in place. They don't have to have a ton of skills, abilities or merit badges in place...that's really just fleshing things out...but the basic underpinnings and archetecture of how those systems work needs to be built.

- The OTHER big consideration that I have for what should be in the initial release is that there should be something that can secure GW some sort of REVENUE stream. That (IMO) is criticaly important because every dollar GW can bring in is a dollar they don't need to seek out in investment. The biggest danger to PFO (IMO) is if they can't get enough funding to build the features that are going to attract people to the game AND pay something, then they are risking the game going into a tail spin and die. So what I would like to see them do in the earliest release is get something in the game that starts to give them an actual revenue stream so they are more secure about having the financial resources to build out the rest of the game features that draw in more revenue... it's a feedback loop as well. So far what they've really talked about charging for is skill learning time. IF (and I'm assuming here) that is thier primary revenue driver then I think that's got to be a high priority item to get into the game as early as possible....so they can have some funding independant of investment dollars. So people have to be able to purchase skill learning time...and they have to have a reason to WANT to purchase skill learning time. What does skill learning time do? It unlocks the ability to earn merit badges which give you in game abilities and which allow you to advance archtypes. To my mind, that means all these systems need to be in the game early on...because they are going to be what helps drives the games funding engine. They don't have to have upper/higher level abilities/merit badges and archtype levels filled in, because it'll take quite awhile for any of us to get there. But they do need to build the basic archectecture/underpinnings of how each of those systems work...and should probably have a couple levels worth of stuff built (if not fully fleshed out) to give players something to work toward. My priority is for there to be a reason for me to want to shell out $15-$20 to GW on day one of PFO.

Anyway, those are my thoughts. YMMV.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I can see your point. My character's RP actually has him as a member of a noble house, so he isn't a peasant. However I could easily justify him dressed in wool using crappy weapons. Robbed by bandits, going incognito, trying to experience life as a commoner, etc.

However given your point I could concede another name might work better. Adventurer perhaps.

While the system designers aren't graphics artists, we are absolutely going to need:

A working vendor system
A working health system
A working character screen
A working inventory system
A working chat system
A working options menu
A working skill training system

Etc.

And I think the first few things after that should be:

A hunger system (Creates need for resource consumption)
Item decay (Also a resource consumer)
Player companies
A basic crafting system

If that leaves them time to make the first two levels of each archetype before the graphics and audio are ready then I guess they should.

I had always envisioned being able to get some skill training in from the start as well but not necessarily archetype related. I figured the peasant... or adventurer would come with some melee skills, some ranged skills, and some magic skills (both divine and arcane.) Say 3-5 of each. Though they will probably be locked out of some of them once they chose their actual class. And that you may or may not give the adventurer class some things they could train that would still be useful when they chose their final class. Say like "Experienced Traveler- You get better at packing for long journeys" that you have to train then walk X distance in game or perhaps visit X number of locations on a list for the merit badge, and you can then fit a higher volume of gear into bags and packs you are carrying. Useful to everyone no matter your class. Also if basic crafting is in, you have something to train right there. You could also add some social skills. Or trade skills. I can't fully say until we have more details on what kinds of skills will exist.

Goblin Squad Member

I am vehemently opposed to anything that forces an arbitrary story arc on my character(s).

Goblin Squad Member

@Andius,

Yeah, I kinda wonder how they are going to approach the initial starting character. I can think of 3 different approaches....

1) You have no skills/abilities but you can learn the first few merit badges (which give you abilities) with no skill and with actions that aren't really dependant upon you using any ability (e.g. Go see the "Melee Combat" trainer down the street from your starting position and talking to him earns you a Merit Badge and a basic ability in Melee Combat).

2) You start out being given a handfull of basic abilities relevant for each potential archtype...even if they don't match the archtype you eventualy go for (e.g. You start out knowing some cantrip level magic even if you decide you are going to pursue the Fighter path). Maybe you get locked out of some of these when you pick an archtype or maybe they say they are low enough level to not really matter and just have you keep them.

3) You pick the archtype you want to pursue initialy in Character Generation and you get a few basic relevant abilities (e.g. essentialy you start out as a Level 0 whatever).

I could see any of those working potentialy.

EDIT: Technicaly you are probably right, they could probably get away without the actual archtype system in game. I do think though, they'd want to at least have the information about which skills/abilities/merit badges led to the 1st level of each archtype availble to the players so that players would have some roadmap of what merit badges to work on in order to pursue the archtype they were interested in when those got implimented. Even if they need to tweak/adjust it during implimentation...better to give the players at least something to work off of. YMMV.

Lantern Lodge

As a skill based game, where the "classes" are really not classes (to my understanding) then it would be like Skyrim, you learned an ability so you know it, you can get better but you don't need to.

There should be no picking a class at all, just if you pick all meelee abilities then, hey! you are on the fighter path, or if you pick up a spellbook and learn to use it, hey! you are on the wizard path, if you learn both then, hey! you are a custom path.

Anyway you pick should bother anything else you learn. This is why I am excited about the game, cause I hate classes and being restricted by such. Even the new Elder Scrolls Online has classes, so I won't play it.

Opening should be you appear with a dagger and, a cantrip, and your starting feat. Then you can find a trainer (which makes sense for low level abilities but high level you kinda discover things for yourself) the trainer then gives you the starting eq needed (unlocks your bloodline, a spellbook, a sword, etc) then asks something of you in return. You complete the task, Grats on your first badge, have a few coins and time to move on.

Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:
I am vehemently opposed to anything that forces an arbitrary story arc on my character(s).

^ This. In a sandbox don't tell me where I came from, or what my job is. That's for me to decide. Be it I'm a ex-noble sorcerer from Cheliax, a fur trapper from Irrisen, or a sell sword from Varisia.

Goblin Squad Member

That's not really the point. The point is a single class you work into your archetype from. You can call it peasant, adventurer, person-of-non-specific-background-with-non-specific-objectives, or whatever you want.

The details are not as important as the core of the idea.

1 to 50 of 174 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Licensed Products / Digital Games / Pathfinder Online / Goblinworks Blog: Begin the Beguine All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.