Destiny: $500 million and it STILL can't touch the depth of play GW will achieve with PFO


Pathfinder Online

51 to 82 of 82 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Goblin Squad Member

sspitfire1 wrote:
Lifedragn wrote:
We are going against the trend to get to More Game.
Doesn't that make us all hipsters?

Only if you're posting that question from an Apple Watch.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm a kid! I just have a few more birthdays under my belt than most!


Proxima Sin of Brighthaven wrote:
sspitfire1 wrote:
Lifedragn wrote:
We are going against the trend to get to More Game.
Doesn't that make us all hipsters?
Only if you're posting that question from an Apple Watch.

Never. And I truly mean never. That's just too much.

I did, however, post it from what is described as the "most tragically hip coffee shop ever." An accurate description, I might add. :)

Goblin Squad Member

I appreciate the depth and richness of the Golarion setting and the GW team's efforts to go out of their way to give us something different. By contrast, GameSpot described "Destiny" as "a multiplayer shooter that cobbles together elements of massively multiplayer games but overlooks the lessons developers of such games learned many years ago"


Such as...?

Goblin Squad Member

The well developed religious and socioeconomic background. The rich plethora of races and nationalities. The extensive variation within roles that almost guarantees that even despite any core, essential characteristics, every character will be different.

Goblin Squad Member

Caldeathe Baequiannia wrote:
The extensive variation within roles that almost guarantees that even despite any core, essential characteristics, every character will be different.

Never underestimated the player tendency to build "iconic" characters (where you can translate iconic as "cookie cutter min/max characters powerbuilt to a downloaded template") that all look identical.

Goblin Squad Member

I have been blown away by how easy it is to tell folks apart. Even without names in a group of 12, it was easy to recognize individual Characters at a glance in PFO. That's a real accomplishment.

Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:
I have been blown away by how easy it is to tell folks apart. Even without names in a group of 12, it was easy to recognize individual Characters at a glance in PFO. That's a real accomplishment.

It may have to do with the small population, not some "major accomplishment". You've probably been playing with the same 12 people for 5 months already.

Goblin Squad Member

Bluddwolf wrote:
You've probably been playing with the same 12 people for 5 months already.

Nope. I'd never grouped with most of them.


True enough. I was there. Anyways, even so, I suspect it will be very easy for players to have very distinctive styles in this game.

As to the cookie-cutter bit, that remains to be seen. But right now, there is some definite "This works best so everybody uses it" going on with the short bow and long bow.

That may also be a symptom of the fact that we only have 6 or so attacks to choose from for each of those weapons.

Goblin Squad Member

sspitfire1 wrote:

True enough. I was there. Anyways, even so, I suspect it will be very easy for players to have very distinctive styles in this game.

As to the cookie-cutter bit, that remains to be seen. But right now, there is some definite "This works best so everybody uses it" going on with the short bow and long bow.

That may also be a symptom of the fact that we only have 6 or so attacks to choose from for each of those weapons.

Well against low level critters (up to easy reds) Staff AoE spells are far better than bows so I suspect it is not just "what works best".

I think people like the idea of bows and want to use them - and that is part of the reason for the obsession with them. The second factor is staff spells take a bit more to understand so the other attraction to bows is they are a simpler weapon to use for a beginner (which also explains why suddenly with an influx of new players about 6 weeks ago the previous forum discussions which tended to be "wizards are OP" changed to "archers are OP" without any real change to the bow in game :).

Goblin Squad Member

That will probably all change when ammunition/charge-gems make their appearance.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Harad Navar wrote:
That will probably all change when ammunition/charge-gems make their appearance.

Agreed. With only 20 or even 50 arrows to use per Quiver, I probably will make 1 or 2 bow attacks against Reds before falling back onto my short swords just to conserve ammo.

Goblin Squad Member

Do I remember there being some sort of charge-like thingy for melee weapons?

Goblin Squad Member

If I understand correctly, ammunition and charge-gems are to be the balancing factor for the added safety of being able to remain at range. Melee has no corollary I can think of.

Goblin Squad Member

Conjecture: Rations. Iron rations and water skins. Each rat weighs 1.

Goblin Squad Member

Harad Navar wrote:
Do I remember there being some sort of charge-like thingy for melee weapons?

NEVER. NEVER. NEVER. Ranged has limited use because it's got so much more range than melee. In a zombie apocalypse you want a trusty pipe wrench because it never runs out of ammo. That's the fundamental balance.

There may someday be a medium-term buff to melee weapons that uses charges/timer before it disappears a la GW2s Sharpening Stones.

Goblin Squad Member

Harad Navar wrote:
Do I remember there being some sort of charge-like thingy for melee weapons?

Ryan said he'd like there to be some kind of consumable for Melee Attacks that would be required in order to be at maximum effectiveness.

Hrm, reading it now I'm not as sure he was trying to differentiate between melee weapons on the one hand ranged weapons that consume ammo on the other. It's a very old post.

The upside of letting you keep a weapon and armor is you'll be able (likely) to have some chance to kill off whatever is near your husk so you can loot it and get some of your stuff back, and you can fight your way through to your buddies if there's not too many monsters between you and them.

The downside is that it means that weapons and armor won't be meaningful items to craft in large quantities. In EVE, ships and ship fittings are crafted in huge quantities because they're being destroyed all the time. But under our current plan that won't happen to arms and armor. With less loss there will be less demand, and with less demand there will be less value in crafting those things.

["Less loss" is not none. And "less value" is not none. People will still make and sell arms and armor, but they won't do it in high volumes like people do with ships and ship fittings in EVE.]

Instead what I anticipate we will create is a system where you need to combine a consumable resource with your weapons and armor to get maximum effect from them, and those resources won't survive the trip to the grave. So crafters will make lots of those resources instead of making lots of swords and armor sets. It's unlikely that someone will be just a guy who makes swords. It's much more likely that guy will make sword consumables, and the occasional sword on commission.

Those consumables will come in a variety of quality levels, so your decision about what to go adventuring with will be "don't adventure with resources you can't afford to lose", but normally you'll have the best weapon and the best armor you can afford.

Therefore actually losing a primary weapon and a good set of armor will be catastrophic, since replacement prices will be high and you may have to wait for someone to craft what you want on commission. I'm sure there will be all sorts of strategies for dealing with THAT issue, and it will be pretty interesting to see what develops.

Also there will be interesting choices to make about what you keep in hand. You may be loathe to swap from your awesome sword to a ranged weapon because if you die, the ranged weapon will cycle with you through death but you might lose that sword...

The part at the end about losing your sword if you switch to your ranged weapon I'm pretty sure is no longer accurate, and other aspects might have changed as well.

So, I don't think there will ever be anything like Ammo that is consumed for every Melee Attack. But there might be some kind of consumable that buffs Melee Attacks.


Neadenil Edam wrote:
sspitfire1 wrote:

True enough. I was there. Anyways, even so, I suspect it will be very easy for players to have very distinctive styles in this game.

As to the cookie-cutter bit, that remains to be seen. But right now, there is some definite "This works best so everybody uses it" going on with the short bow and long bow.

That may also be a symptom of the fact that we only have 6 or so attacks to choose from for each of those weapons.

Well against low level critters (up to easy reds) Staff AoE spells are far better than bows so I suspect it is not just "what works best".

I think people like the idea of bows and want to use them - and that is part of the reason for the obsession with them. The second factor is staff spells take a bit more to understand so the other attraction to bows is they are a simpler weapon to use for a beginner (which also explains why suddenly with an influx of new players about 6 weeks ago the previous forum discussions which tended to be "wizards are OP" changed to "archers are OP" without any real change to the bow in game :).

You can take levels in fighter and use a bow is why.

Best of both worlds.

What becomes META in a game is rarely the best possible, it is the kind of balance between best and easiest. So, you are right, but I think that the fact you can carry a bow as a secondary weapon and still DPS is why. Nobody wants to be a fighter wizard, that's effectively cutting your exp in half.

And once armor is working against spellcasting (is it already?) it will be even more toward bows.

The lack of misses is a big deal, too. No spec, no misses. No idea why they aren't changing this. Other than "It's hard."

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Armor has been working as intended vs cantrips from day 1. The intent changed a little, making heavy armor less resistant to energy types and light armor slightly more so. There will probably be further balance changes as the game progresses.

CEO, Goblinworks

1 person marked this as a favorite.

There is an idea for a design for weapon specific consumables that you would craft with the same skills, facilities and components as the weapons themselves. Imagine something like whetstones or arrow staighteners, etc. They would have a limited time effect and you would want them active whenever you faced a significant combat so you would want to carry a lot of them and use them liberally, and they could not be threaded.

That would give us an economic engine that would power the crafting characters who want to make weapons even if the demand for weapons is artificially supressed by Threads.

The downside is that it is really finnicky and requires almost every character to spend time micro-managing stuff in the field, under stress, which seems likely to become "not fun" very quickly.

The designers have been noodling over ideas for repair kits for weapons and armor which might be a better solution with the same basic idea of parallelling the crafting of those items with something that will be consumable but won't feel like a life or death choice in the heat of battle.

This may all be moot though. Practically speaking, characters may die often enough that they are consuming weapons and armor fast enough to create meaningful economic activity without these other systems.

Goblin Squad Member

Ryan Dancey wrote:

There is an idea for a design for weapon specific consumables that you would craft with the same skills, facilities and components as the weapons themselves. Imagine something like whetstones or arrow staighteners, etc. They would have a limited time effect and you would want them active whenever you faced a significant combat so you would want to carry a lot of them and use them liberally, and they could not be threaded.

That would give us an economic engine that would power the crafting characters who want to make weapons even if the demand for weapons is artificially supressed by Threads.

The downside is that it is really finnicky and requires almost every character to spend time micro-managing stuff in the field, under stress, which seems likely to become "not fun" very quickly.

The designers have been noodling over ideas for repair kits for weapons and armor which might be a better solution with the same basic idea of parallelling the crafting of those items with something that will be consumable but won't feel like a life or death choice in the heat of battle.

This may all be moot though. Practically speaking, characters may die often enough that they are consuming weapons and armor fast enough to create meaningful economic activity without these other systems.

The Gothic game series did that, though like most FRPG if you played well your char got so OP you never needed to bother with them eventually as everything just fell over anyway.

There is always the possibility of consumables that break DR or resistances by adding a small amount of fire/acid/sonic/etc damage or work like the TT silversheen etc counting the weapon as a special material for a while.


Couple of things:

@Decius: I think Celest was talking about spell failure chance (or PFO's equivalent) for armor- which I not believe is in yet. Hopefully soon though. I'd like to see how the system ends up actually working in the field.

@Edam: Blanches are already in, but not functioning.

@Being: I personally would prefer to eat Snakes, especially if they are Liquid.

In general about bows: Kenton Stone and I did something terrible to the Razmirians the other night with both of us using a bow and carefully timed Evades. Then there is the Windrider business wizards can do with their wands. So yeah, charges and arrows will be balancing, for sure. I agree with Poximate that sharped steel and blunted wood is valuable because it doesn't require charges.

@Ryan: If we end up killing each other a lot over towers, banditry or via feuds, then I think "Yes, there will be a high turnover rate in arms and armor to keep crafters busy." If its just killing PvE mobs, though, we simply don't die enough for it to matter much.

Goblin Squad Member

Well I think this is a silly comparison that being said Destiny has WAAAAAY BETTER GRASS!! FIX THE GRASS!!!

Goblin Squad Member

Ryan Dancey wrote:
This may all be moot though. Practically speaking, characters may die often enough that they are consuming weapons and armor fast enough to create meaningful economic activity without these other systems.

I expect this to be the case, and drastically prefer replacing a weapon every 20 deaths to having to manage lots of consumable items.

Goblin Squad Member

sspitfire1 wrote:


@Ryan: If we end up killing each other a lot over towers, banditry or via feuds, then I think "Yes, there will be a high turnover rate in arms and armor to keep crafters busy." If its just killing PvE mobs, though, we simply don't die enough for it to matter much.

Plus if you are fighting nasty stuff PvE you tend not to wear your "best gear" anyway.

Goblinworks Game Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nihimon wrote:
Ryan Dancey wrote:
This may all be moot though. Practically speaking, characters may die often enough that they are consuming weapons and armor fast enough to create meaningful economic activity without these other systems.
I expect this to be the case, and drastically prefer replacing a weapon every 20 deaths to having to manage lots of consumable items.

Yeah, one of the reasons we haven't spent a lot of cycles on long-duration consumables for weapons and armor is that it may be superfluous due to how fast people go through gear. If there's rapid turnover of weapons and armor, the crafters that make them would probably prefer to be seen as gear crafters than consumable crafters. However, if people tend to hang onto such gear longer, it'd be nice for crafters to have stuff to make as a sideline between bigger gigs.

But we're also waiting on some tech to get them working right. For one, it would be nice to attach the buff to the actual weapon rather than any weapon the character uses (right now, buffs are purely on the character). For another, the armor consumable needs the same concept of percentage reduction as we need for creatures that are supposed to be keyword-vulnerable; that is, the armor buffs need to be on the order of "X% flat reduction" rather than "+X to all resistances" since the latter could be combined with already good resistances to make higher level players virtually immune to low level players in a way we don't want.

Regardless, the plan for long-duration consumables is that they're a small bonus at low level and make up a bigger and bigger potential portion of your damage/defense at high level, so we've got a while before you're high enough level that adding them would introduce a sudden shift in the necessity of using them.

Repair kits, as Ryan notes, are also sketched out now. We figured out some cool math that means we can keep expected value/difficulty to make for a repair kit consistent with the value it's replacing across a wide range of items. Meaning we should be able to do repairing where crafters make kits and give them to others to use rather than having to go through a whole process of handing over your weapon to someone that can already make it. We were worried that, if we went with handing them over, it would be so laborious that it would be less a repair system and more a "crafters trawl the markets for damaged items that are cheaper than the raw materials they're worth" system. At which point, it would have made more sense to have a salvaging system than a repair system. (We do also have a sketched out design for a salvaging system.) Repair kits may also be enough item management to be interesting, and adding whetstones and armor plates would just be too much to manage.

Goblin Squad Member

RHMG Animator wrote:

To get on Topic,

The reason Destiny does not have much depth is because they are basing this on their experience making Halo, and FPS shooters.
Further more looking at Destiny, the game player is simpler, more pick up and go play for a bit, and world static.

PFO on the other hand, has more advanced gameplay, requires some learning, and the world is shaped by the player's actions.

It has more Complicated gameplay, mostly do to an incredibly poor combat implementation, not more ADVANCED gameplay. Do not confuse the two. Complicated is not always better (in fact its almost universally worse)

it requires some learning because the developer has done such an incomplete design of the UI, which requires you to break immersion and go outside the game for the answers to many simple need to know things (like anything related to skills and xp)

The world is shaped NOT shaped by player actions. That is just an illusion to keep you forking over $$$ each month (kind of like the illusion that voters shape the government in the us) . At some point in the DISTANT future players should be able to INFLUENCE portions of the user created superstructure of the game, but the base infrastructure and game world will be designed and built by GW and players will not be able to change it.

Goblin Squad Member

Stephen Cheney wrote:
Yeah, one of the reasons we haven't spent a lot of cycles on long-duration consumables for weapons and armor is that it may be superfluous due to how fast people go through gear. If there's rapid turnover of weapons and armor, the crafters that make them would probably prefer to be seen as gear crafters than consumable crafters. However, if people tend to hang onto such gear longer, it'd be nice for crafters to have stuff to make as a sideline between bigger gigs.

One thing I have been asking myself if this 20 durability is the final value? I may have dreamed it, but I think I saw something somewhere that when threading arrived durability is going to be set lower?

I remember this because I had an suggestion (I think I made it at least) that perhaps the quality modifier on the material could affect the durability (not only having an encumbrance effect).

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd still like to see PvE dropped gear start with low durability to drive people to crafters and reduce its prevalence in the AH

Goblin Squad Member

Caldeathe Baequiannia wrote:
I'd still like to see PvE dropped gear start with low durability to drive people to crafters and reduce its prevalence in the AH

It might. In the early stages of Alpha I felt underutilized as a crafter.

It might all be moot after about 21-25 days when the first refiners and crafters can make Tier 2 gear. Giving about +50 (on a d200) to attack/defense might render much of the Tier1 armors at least second rate.

51 to 82 of 82 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Licensed Products / Digital Games / Pathfinder Online / Destiny: $500 million and it STILL can't touch the depth of play GW will achieve with PFO All Messageboards

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