Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Awhile back there was a topic comparing this game to Destiny. A triple AAA title with an insanely huge budget, which is fairly light on the innovation like any other triple A title.
While I'm sure it makes us all feel good to compare ourselves to games with such bloated budgets they are not our primary competition. Our real competition is games like Arch-Age, Black Dessert, and... Life is Feudal. Games, some of which had smaller budgets and started around the same time, that really push the envelope of innovation.
Life is Feudal just recently went into alpha and I decided to try it out. So I'd like to talk a bit about my first impressions of the LiF alpha vs. the PFO alpha.
What's Similar?
Both games are sandboxes. (Though as explained further on LiF is more of a true sandbox)
Both games have Open World PvP.
Both games have alignment systems with meaningful consequences. (Both of which are similarly useless at this point.)
Both games have loot drop in PvP. (LiF is full loot drop while PFO is partial.)
Both games have durability loss on items. (LiF is from use while PFO is from death.)
And most importantly...
Both games feature a player driven economy, territorial combat, and player interaction as the primary forms of content.
So with that said, what does PFO have going for it and what does LiF have going for it?
Things that Set LiF Apart from PFO
1. Graphics - It's really rather undebatable. LiF is a beautiful fairly modern looking game while at this point PFO's graphics look a bit dated.
2. Terraforming - It's one of the central features of the game and done EXTREMELY well. You can bring up a view showing the elevation of all the surrounding tiles, making terraforming so easy a child could figure it out. The small tile sizes in comparison to games such as Wurm also make it easier to really customize the landscape just how you want it. Best terraforming system I have ever seen in a game not built out of blocks.
3. Fast Paced Combat- LiF uses a full manual aim combat system that is more able to accommodate the fact internet speeds and the average computer are getting faster and faster while PFO's combat system already feels outdated. However their system may still be a bit more fast paced for the average internet speed and system still being used today once they reach the MMO phase.
Things that Set PFO apart from LiF
1. Fantasy Setting- LiF feels like playing an individual character from Age of Empires II (medieval setting but not fantasy) while PFO offers a fantasy setting complete with elves, dwarves, and magic.
2. Less Grinding- PFO offers time based XP gains with achievement grinds to unlock the skills you want to spend it on. LiF uses a usage based level raising system.
3. No Skill Cap- PFO allows you to train as many skills as you want on a single character while LiF has a skill and stat cap meaning you can only progress a single character so far.
LiF's Minimum Viable Product
Like PFO LiF is rolling out with a more gradual approach, however they have what I feel is a better approach to it. Rather than releasing a Minimum Viable Product MMO they have given players the ability to host their own 64 man servers. On those servers you have access to the finished terraforming system, the nearly finished crafting system, and the combat system which is a work in progress. This system will be updated with more content such as character customization as those kinds of things become available.
My first impression of LiF's MVP was that it was additively fun. All of the major content drivers of their game such as terraforming, PvP, and territorial control are in the game giving you a reason to want to log back in as soon as you have the time.
The content that they have put in functions fairly well, while there are some server stability issues I've found very few problems with the game's released content.
PFO's Minimium Viable Product
Rolling out from the start as an MMO seems to may have been a bit ambitious for an MVP product. The game is missing major content drivers (PvP? Territorial Control?), almost none of the features currently implemented feel even close to finished. As I've heard other community members say the game feels "souless" and I find I'm having to force myself to log in.
Overall Impression
I feel like it's fairly hard to argue that at this point LiF has the better product. I believe they are also working with a smaller budget and started a bit later. PFO has a lot more content but LiF's method of focusing on less aspects at a time until they are functioning perfectly than moving on to others give's their game a powerful first impression vs. PFO.
PFO may be able to gain the leg up within 2-5 years because their slow paced tab targeting system allows for a larger server but the concern for me is:
1. How many players will they lose in the meantime?
2. How far with LiF and PFO's other competition advance while we are still waiting for PFO to get the basics in and functioning well?
3. How many years before full aim combat is viable on a large scale?
Bottom line, is a simple message to GW. Your competition is out there, it's organized, and it actually looks pretty scary. If you want PFO to grow as large as EVE you need to give them very strong, very solid reasons to choose this title over titles like LiF, Arche Age and Black Desert.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I see the competition at its highest in the form of Arch Age.
LiF still feels like PFO, aways from being done. Also, they have been plagued with quite a few problems, and I don't think they are any where near allowing for a large single shard.
That being said, I think the threading system, rather than full looting will be a game changer, and allow for PFO to come out ahead in numbers. With tab targeting, more structured PvP system, and more consequences it seems like PFO will have legs to stand on.
I think that PFO offers a better compromise for PvP/Non-PvPers, than LiF. Although, some of those systems have yet to come out
I think at this point, LiF might have PFO right now, but once WoT is out, with looting, encumbrance, companies, feuds, criticals, ammo, and the rest of the consumables, I think it is a different ball game.
I mean, we are talking 6 weeks here that is going to produce a lot of content into the game. I think we should re-evaluate at the patch AFTER WoT goes live in EE.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I feel like it's fairly hard to argue that at this point LiF has the better product.
This sentence seems to read exactly the opposite of what I believe your message is; you appear to be saying that LIF *does* have the better product, thus you must not believe it's hard to argue.
Some questions:
- How is the communication between LIF's developers and their customers?
- Are the customers participating in development?
- Can a 64-character server develop a sustainable economy?
I feel like it's fairly hard to argue that at this point LiF has the better product.This sentence seems to read exactly the opposite of what I believe your message is; you appear to be saying that LIF *does* have the better product, thus you must not believe it's hard to argue.
Some questions:
- How is the communication between LIF's developers and their customers?
- Are the customers participating in development?
- Can a 64-character server develop a sustainable economy?
No fare! You edited before I could reply.
Anyways, you commented on how ArcheAge's budget puts it in a different category from PFO. But if the game is priced similar to PFO and is a reasonable alternative for players in the market that Ryan is aiming at, then it is a reasonable choice for comparison. But I suspect realizing that is why you changed your comment.
To add one more question to your list:
Does LiF or ArcheAge have the same depth of game play as PFO or, at least, the same potential for depth of game play?
I know PFO has a lot of potential because it has a lot of very smart minds- on both sides of the game- with very broad and deep understanding of the game and can-do-attitudes to make the game work really well for a very broad range of player interests. In short, I feel like the sky is still the limit for this game.
The comparison with Destiny was more of a joke/exercise in PFO elitism. They're targeting too completely different markets.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Some questions:
- How is the communication between LIF's developers and their customers?
- Are the customers participating in development?
- Can a 64-character server develop a sustainable economy?
Haven't looked at their forums so I can't say. That being said I personally am disillusioned with the whole crowdforging concept. I do not feel it is a process which is always conducive to creating a truly quality product, as while many informed and thoughtful voices add value to the process I feel they are often outweighed by the sheer weight of those who have the opposite qualities.
Regardless of what you believe, I think the true proof of which system is better is reflected by the quality of the product, which is why I chose to use that as the sole basis of comparison.
PS. Video is a bit rough but it's currently uploading to YouTube.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
To add one more question to your list:
Does LiF or ArcheAge have the same depth of game play as PFO or, at least, the same potential for depth of game play?
I feel for ArcheAge the answer is no; but for LiF:
And most importantly...
Both games feature a player driven economy, territorial combat, and player interaction as the primary forms of content.
The player actually has MORE influence over the world even. There is not set settlement spots. At least so far, every part of the world is modifiable and customizable by the character. The level of depth will be shown in the video I'll be posting shortly.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Anyways, you commented on how ArcheAge's budget puts it in a different category from PFO. But if the game is priced similar to PFO and is a reasonable alternative for players in the market that Ryan is aiming at, then it is a reasonable choice for comparison. But I suspect realizing that is why you changed your comment.
No, I didn't change it. I was trying to combine two posts into one to avoid bloat, but Ryan responded to my earlier post about the budget before I could finish, and it would've looked weird if I'd followed through.
I still believe that games with dramatically different budgets aren't fair to compare with one another, most especially in terms of graphics, which we've all discussed--and Goblinworks's stated outright--as eating huge amounts of budget. If one hasn't the budget, one can't compete graphically.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Andius - I'm really curious about your comments about graphics.
I've looked at this game and the graphics seem neither meaningfully better or worse than ours. What is it about Life is Feudal's graphics that has grabbed your attention?
A look at Life Is Feudal's graphics and a brief look at terraforming.
Anyways, you commented on how ArcheAge's budget puts it in a different category from PFO. But if the game is priced similar to PFO and is a reasonable alternative for players in the market that Ryan is aiming at, then it is a reasonable choice for comparison. But I suspect realizing that is why you changed your comment.No, I didn't change it. I was trying to combine two posts into one to avoid bloat, but Ryan responded to my earlier post about the budget before I could finish, and it would've looked weird if I'd followed through.
I still believe that games with dramatically different budgets aren't fair to compare with one another, most especially in terms of graphics, which we've all discussed--and Goblinworks's stated outright--as eating huge amounts of budget. If one hasn't the budget, one can't compete graphically.
After watching some videos of ArcheAge, I doubt PFO will be competing in the same market. There are also some big difference in how the two games approach "Sandbox" and "PvP" - In particular, ArcheAge is not full PvP and seems to have its Sandbox centered more around robust player customization rather than players building their own world.
Also, watching videos where the players constantly have the view spinning around the place can be quite nauseating.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A look at Life Is Feudal's graphics and a brief look at terraforming.Andius - I'm really curious about your comments about graphics.
I've looked at this game and the graphics seem neither meaningfully better or worse than ours. What is it about Life is Feudal's graphics that has grabbed your attention?
I understand that Mike is both the sole map maker and the primary texture artist for the maps. Given that he has most recently been working on the monumental task of getting us a full-sized map to work with, I'd say its a little early to start comparing his textures with someone else's.
That said, I do like the density of the trees more- perhaps that can be a long term goal for the PFO forest hexes.
I also like that the nodes are more integrated into the terrain. That would also be neat to see in PFO, but also a long time to come.
Terraforming is cute, but not a valid feature in PFO at this point. Ryan has been pretty clear in the past that he doesn't want anything in the game (or many things, anyways) that a single player can do by his/herself.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I had mentioned this game long ago, along with "Trials of Ascension" as two games to watch for. Life is Feudal also has a pretty neat wounds" system, and a pretty novel skill set, even medics that can patch up broken bones and repair/perform surgery on internal organs. My post at the time was widely panned, but you can see what is out there, and the competition will be stiff.
What draws me to PFO though is the ability to build a settlement and be part of the community that lives there. So far I like the players that have chosen Forgeholm and Ozem's Vigil (I have spend more time as a Dwarf, but will get my human worked up as well). Community is key. If I want to play a solo game I can do that anywhere. PFO seems to have a pretty solid base so far.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
LiF is legit competition for PFO, looks a bit ahead of PFO in some aspects right now. Andius made some points there but where I disagree badly is about crowdforging.
Crowdforging is legit in PFO. I honestly cannot believe how legit it is. I thought it was going to be a lip service kind of thing with an occasional poll. Dude these guys are in here talking with us every single day. Say whatever else you want about PFo's development but flipping off crowdforging is just being a doosh.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A look at Life Is Feudal's graphics and a brief look at terraforming.Andius - I'm really curious about your comments about graphics.
I've looked at this game and the graphics seem neither meaningfully better or worse than ours. What is it about Life is Feudal's graphics that has grabbed your attention?
Summary of differences noted:
+Lens flare+Render distance for terrain
+Water
+Trees
+Ground vegetation
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Terraforming is cute, but not a valid feature in PFO at this point. Ryan has been pretty clear in the past that he doesn't want anything in the game (or many things, anyways) that a single player can do by his/herself.
Terraforming is something you either have as a central gameplay feature or don't do at all.
The question is not if terraforming is a good feature for PFO or if it fits with Ryan's vision but if it is something that will draw players to LiF over PFO.
LiF has a smoothly functioning incredibly detailed terraforming system that does not seem to place undue lag on the server. I think ultimately that combine with the manual aim system will condemn this game to smaller servers.
But if enough people decide a smaller world you have such a level of control over is worth it vs. a single world with less control then those many small worlds will end up drawing in a great many players interested in player driven content and open world PvP. AKA PFO's target audience.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think LiF is more Mine Craft meets Darkfall, while PFO is more Eve meets Darkfall.
I agree though that the terraforming could be a big pull for a lot of people, but that seems to be almost a game unto itself. Afew friends of mine have played through LiF, they like it, but if you don't have a decent computer then PvP can be a pain.
Everything Decius pointed out could be better in PFO, as far as graphics go. Something that I actually mentioned on Ideascale, but it got shot down weirdly enough.
The games world seems a bit more detailed than ours, but brings me to in idea that is presented here:
Keep the Gathering Nodes the same, but you could add specific natural looking features to terrain to indicate what is there, and maybe decrease how much is shown based on how many raw resources are left.
So in the croplands you might find Cotton Plants, Sheep, or Cannabis, for Cotton/Wool/Hemp.
Or in the Hills you could have bushes of berries, and different cliffs with browner/darker colored rock strata for coal.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I had mentioned this game long ago, along with "Trials of Ascension" as two games to watch for. Life is Feudal also has a pretty neat wounds" system, and a pretty novel skill set, even medics that can patch up broken bones and repair/perform surgery on internal organs. My post at the time was widely panned, but you can see what is out there, and the competition will be stiff.
What draws me to PFO though is the ability to build a settlement and be part of the community that lives there. So far I like the players that have chosen Forgeholm and Ozem's Vigil (I have spend more time as a Dwarf, but will get my human worked up as well). Community is key. If I want to play a solo game I can do that anywhere. PFO seems to have a pretty solid base so far.
Gloria Victus too. These fast combat, nice graphics and/or survival/combat sandbox indie games will probably look better than PFO initially but not scale as well if PFO manages to grow is how I see it as per your mention of community.
I hope PFO EE can provide some opportunities for player created initiatives to differentiate what is possible in this game from such other (additionally interesting) indie titles.
I'm working on one such idea though with several new jobs and applications and moving sticks it's been slower going lately.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I like tab targeting. Having to use a mouse to point and click at a foe as my only means to target them is frustrating to me. I'm not that coordinated. :-)
Now, later on, if they want to add mouse targeting as a secondary option to target foes or even auto-targeting your closest foes, for those who want it but still keep tab targeting, go for it.
I don't see PFO's graphics as outdated. Incomplete, yes, but not outdated. It looks just fine to me. And once we get character looks that don't look either mad or constipated, it will look even better. Swamplands are really funny looking currently without any water in them but we will get them eventually. Maybe in the next build?
Are the graphics the greatest in the world? Nope. But then again a game that is beautiful to look at but somewhat soulless is a game I won't play for long. PFO has soul. Currently a very small soul but once all the things are added in that are planned to be in for the WOTs, it will have a really big soul.
The community also helps to make it a good soul game. I've played other games and just sort of dabbled in their community boards, usually looking for answers to problems I'm having in the game or maps. But here? I'm involved and want to be involved in this community [Join Kabal!] because the community itself makes me want to be involved.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think Destiny certainly is competition for this game. Any game is that provides entertainment that players could be getting from PFO. In this specific example Destiny offers PVP and PVE experiences with other groups of players. It also has a low time commitment (drop in and drop out.)
As for Life is Feudal, I must admit I don't know much about it. My impression is that it would be more competition for Wurm Online than PFO.
As for comparing budgets in regards to graphics, not sure if that's relevant. There are countless examples of dynamic gameplay (engagement/fun factor) that ultimately wins out over graphics. Not sure if I can think of one game that has horrible gameplay, but great graphics that can be deemed successful in the long term. Graphics draw players in this is true, but gameplay is what will keep them coming back for more.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Honestly, everything I want from an MMO I'm getting/will get from PfO. Life is Feudal lost me when I saw that it was an MMO, and that LiF: YO was significantly less feature rich.
I would have loved to get a bunch of my friends (meat space and otherwise) from all over to participate in a LiF server, I would even have been willing to be the one who bank-rolled it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think LiF is more Mine Craft meets Darkfall, while PFO is more Eve meets Darkfall.
Legit comparison. I'm sure LiF will have its audience. But PFO is really EVE meets Pathfinder and that's a huge advantage for PFO, the IP. I'm more into fantasy. Elves, Dwarves and boob plate. So you won't catch me in LiF.
As far as the sky goes, the lens flare sun is nice for a realistic game like LiF, but I want a fantasy sky for a high fantasy game. I love the sunsets in PFO.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think LiF is more Mine Craft meets Darkfall, while PFO is more Eve meets Darkfall.
Legit comparison. I'm sure LiF will have its audience. But PFO is really EVE meets Pathfinder and that's a huge advantage for PFO, the IP. I'm more into fantasy. Elves, Dwarves and boob plate. So you won't catch me in LiF.
As far as the sky goes, the lens flare sun is nice for a realistic game like LiF, but I want a fantasy sky for a high fantasy game. I love the sunsets in PFO.
You had me at 'Boob Plate' :D
But yeah, PFO sunsets FTW!
I love the sunsets in PFO.I love the Moon!
I think the moon could be turned down a few notches on the lumens scale- it absolutely blinds me whenever I look at it ;)
Dawn and Dusk rock, though.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
From what I read LiF is going to sell the 64 man private server game in alpha that they made to pay for the development of an mmo, some day. If that is their plan then how many clients do they need to sell of the game they are making to pay for the mmo to be made? Before you can compare having to choose between two mmo's in alpha that you are interested in, you need two mmo's in alpha. It seems very important to have a plan that you are sure can work if you are going to compare one game to another , just looking at graphics or gameplay isn't enough if they fail to fund the mmo, the 10'000 player version I mean.
Do you think it can be done? how big is the market for a game that is just played on small private servers?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here we go. "Ramt" upcoming, fellas. Or "Ranble". Rantble? Rant Bull. Gives you things.
That will be one of the deciding factors I think, having Static Dungeons/Random Dungeons/Escalations will bring in people that will not be attracted to LiF.
The question is, are those people really PFO's target audience?
Andius raises some persuasive arguments here (even his "meh" on crowdforging kind of caught my interest, to be honest). And with regards to the PvE content, I just have to ask—Is PFO being aimed poorly? Is it senselessly splitting da moneys on PvE when the focus is supposed to be PvP and player-world-changing? Or is the multitude of options going to be ultimately helpful to it? Is it okay to scatter your attentions like that? A ton of resources had to be spent to create goblins, wolves and ogres. Is it really worth it?
Most people will be coming to the game to get Fantasy EVE. EVE with a non-terrible community, but still, a PvP-focused player-driven world of battles and bandits and miners and settlements. Is it smart to put resources into stuff like ogres (and, hell, so many different races) when your game looks like it's from five years ago and your great PvP battles—the main focus of the game—are outright, unashamedly, no-excuses nonexistent?
I personally really want to see half-orcs and dwarves and gnomes and the like, but might it have been smarter to put most of those off until after EE? Why are we prioritizing something like that when the actual game graphics still look like, well, "not as good as they need to be"? And when the feat-purchasing system is confusing and unintuitive? And there's still no way to effectively PvP without taking a painful Rep hit? I mean, that last bit basically means the Reputation system is literally broken—it's discouraging the main thing the game is supposed to feature!
I really hope PFO prioritizes its PvP systems (which are, currently, abominable), its construction, and its graphics. I know there are a lot of people on these forums who see the word "PvP" and have the knee-jerk reaction to lash out, but...well, PvP is PFO. End of story.
*Deep breath*
And that is why I understand Andius's distaste for crowdforging. PFO's EE community has a bit of a...lean. A lean that probably isn't going to represent the real demographics when/if the game actually gets off the ground. I have faith in the crowdforging process, though—and in Goblinworks's ability to say no when the process flops.
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The most important thing for PvP in Pathfinder Online is that it be meaningful.
To make it meaningful we need to have things to do other than kill each other.
The critical building block is the economy. The biggest allocation of the effort we have invested into this game has gone into its economic system. That's why there are so many outfits, weapons, implements, etc. and so much richness to the crafting system.
The economy has to exist before there can be meaningful Settlements, but Settlements are the next area where we've spent effort. That's why there are so many structures and so much work has been done on creating modular systems that make it possible to make a lot of different Settlements.
The actual "killing of each other" then becomes a good design sink which is why we're now spending time on things like War of Towers and on targeting and looting.
And of course to make all that work in a huge world that can support thousands of simultaneous players.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It all sounds very complex Ryan. Are you sure you guys shouldn't have invested in making Candy Crush Extreme Pathfinder edition instead? :D
Seriously though, I think the hard limit on players per server for Life is Feudal kind of makes this an inappropriate comparison.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks for your response, Ryan. I agree that the economy and settlements are important, and that they need to exist before PvP does. The thing is, these three things are extremely important and interlocked. Sometimes, stuff like "multiple races" feel more like, well, sideprojects. Like things that really could've waited while we instated Stand and Deliver and looting.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
(paraphrase) The community leans towards PvE and GW might be better to invest in PvP
The most important thing for PvP in Pathfinder Online is that it be meaningful.
To make it meaningful we need to have things to do other than kill each other.
The critical building block is the economy. The biggest allocation of the effort we have invested into this game has gone into its economic system. That's why there are so many outfits, weapons, implements, etc. and so much richness to the crafting system.
The economy has to exist before there can be meaningful Settlements, but Settlements are the next area where we've spent effort. That's why there are so many structures and so much work has been done on creating modular systems that make it possible to make a lot of different Settlements.
The actual "killing of each other" then becomes a good design sink which is why we're now spending time on things like War of Towers and on targeting and looting.
And of course to make all that work in a huge world that can support thousands of simultaneous players.
My survey results actually offer a little bit on this:
1. Players, especially those that had Alpha access, were overwhelmingly more interested in seeing the economy further developed than anything else.
2. PvE barely beat PvP for everything the two were compared on; but the difference was not significant by any means and not translatable to the larger PFO player-base.
3. These results are pretty representative of the PFO FORUM community, which seems to be where GW is getting most of their Crowdforging feedback right now.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Through the magic of project management, more than one thing can be done at a time. Artwork and models for multiple races might not take any significant assets away from the efforts on PvP mechanics and looting of player husks.
As for stand and deliver, I think we've been told that is in the future - the last long thread on stand and deliver sort of showed that concept to be a tangle of expectations, exceptions, and complications. Let's first have the simple PvP mechanics like companies, influence, and feud and faction warfare.
Thanks for your response, Ryan. I agree that the economy and settlements are important, and that they need to exist before PvP does. The thing is, these three things are extremely important and interlocked. Sometimes, stuff like "multiple races" feel more like, well, sideprojects. Like things that really could've waited while we instated Stand and Deliver and looting.
Back to the survey, the folks who *had not yet* played in the Alpha, were most interested in seeing the CRB materials expanded in the game; since PFTT players are a part of Ryan's market, it makes sense to add in a few more races than just humans.
Also, it is worth noting that adding in new races is mostly an arts department thing, while adding in a SAD mechanic is mostly a programmer/game designer department. The programmers are a bit swamped, right now, as I understand it, just getting the MVP stuff in.
Interestingly, Spitfire, your survey was one of the "informants" for my post. Banditry was rated very low on "Priorities and Rankings" while PvP overall was ranked at the bottom. Enhanced Escalations had a 10 and Races had a 16. Feuds had a -10 and Banditry had a -15. That was just something that stuck out at me.