Goblinworks Blog: Early Enrollment "Hold"


Pathfinder Online

101 to 150 of 195 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Leithlen wrote:
As Andius has said multiple times, EE was meant to be feature incomplete, but WORKING.

Might I suggest you pay more attention to what Ryan says?

Everyone who begins play during Early Enrollment will have to accept terms of service that anticipate many rollbacks, changes, fixes, and adjustments. It's the nature of the Early Enrollment concept that problems will be defined, and fixed, as the players and developers Crowdforge. Of course such actions will be implemented in ways that affect the fewest number of players and when there's an extraordinary circumstance some XP compensation may be offered.

We're not dumb enough to suggest we can launch, lock in, and just be perfect. That flies in the face of 20 years of MUD/MMO history.

During Early Enrollment, the only thing we're going to consider sacrosanct is XP. Everything else is subject to rollback, removal, and alteration as necessary to protect the integrity of the game.
Early Enrollment is really an experiment in community building as much as it is in game building. We will clearly make mistakes and have to roll back features and restart systems even fundamental systems like the economy. Everyone who plays in Early Enrollment will know what they're signing on for before they start, and I'm comfortable that some people will want to wait a long while for things to become more settled rather than "waste their time" playing in ways that might be rolled back.

Ryan has been making it very clear for a very long time what we should expect in Early Enrollment. Don't let the fact that some folks who haven't been paying much attention have unreasonable expectations lead you to develop unreasonable expectations yourself.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

How many die-hard sandbox fans do you think exist in the market? Add a small fraction of a percent if Pathfinder fans, a minuscule fraction of the MMO market that will try something new, and you can get a number of subscribers sufficient to cover the costs of future development. Whether or not you do depends on the exact numbers, and I didn't but Goblinworks' investors did.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I think Xeen was completely clear in what he was asking for:

"... Lets think about not deploying any new features till EE. Just focus in on what you have now and get it all working correctly. Maybe just stick to graphics updates and bug fixes."

Pretty clear to me. He's asking for the development to focus on getting everything that's in the game already working and to focus on that to the exclusion of everything else.

"Once you are relatively bug free. Launch it, and then just add bits here and there. Test the living **** out of it before adding another bit."

Here he's less clear, but I think he's referring to 2 things:

1) Test the daylights out of the existing content before adding anything else.
2) When you add more stuff in the future, test and fix is completely before adding anything else.

He's not asking for content to be added bug-free. He's asking for development to focus on fixing issues with existing content before adding new content so that the game develops more-smoothly (but slower) rather than being full of partially working features.

Goblin Squad Member

To square things up more tidily:

One of the major reasons for MVP is to reach cash-flow sooner and therefore reduce dev risk.

But that does mean MVP (and day one First Impressions Count (press etc and players) needs to be worthwile players spending their XP as a by-product of being entertained.

Fail those and the MVP concept fails. I think the eg of LiF is actually quite helpful. Get an MVP that plays and looks fun and you can score >100,000 purchases iirc; albeit PFO's only looking for 10,000 in the 1st 90 days more or less.

And of course let's look on th flip-side/inverse: It will be blue murder field day for the gaming press if they see a chance to write attention-grabbing headlines:-

"PFO GW Devs charge a pint of blood, a steak of panda for players to play unplayable buggy spaghetti code of a road-kill "game"!!!"

An MVP small and successful launch ain't gonna get a great deal of press in comparison.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

DeciusBrutus wrote:
Whether or not you do depends on the exact numbers, and I didn't but Goblinworks' investors did.

I have no opinion about that, but SWTOR's investors made very professional estimations too. AoC's too, WH:AoR's too, WildStar's, TESO's...

I do not judge GW's estimations, but from what I saw these last years, what I can conclude is that most MMO investors are very bad at analysing the market.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.

The Developers have been doing a good job. They have been throwing out as much as they can. The problem as I see it, is that they have been pushed to hard to get out too much... By the players and by Ryan.

If they are given the time they need to fix what they have, they will have a light on content but bug free game.

Goblin Squad Member

AvenaOats wrote:
...PFO's only looking for 10,000 in the 1st 90 days more or less.

Remember also that Goblinworks has to avoid a problem few shops have ever worried about in the gaming industry: too much demand. They don't want everyone and her cousin coming to the game immediately, or they'll upset folks by turning them away; they need small, slow--and, I'm sure they hope, consistent--growth, not a flood.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.

lol I've completely lost track of what people are arguing about

Goblin Squad Member

It's a fallacy to assume that bugs will get fixed faster if everyone else stops working on content.

Expecting the game to be "bug free" (whether you're talking about new content being released bug free, or talking about all development on new content being stopped while every last bug gets fixed) is unreasonable.

Goblin Squad Member

Doc || Allegiant Gemstone Co. wrote:

As a programmer, I disagree with that sentiment completely.

Time constraints are no excuse to deploy buggy and/or incomplete code.

Bugs happen, but shrugging off proper QA because of a hectic delivery schedule is just bad policy.

If GoblinWorks lacks the manpower to thoroughly test, and must rely on Alpha testers, then either the Alpha testers suck at testing, or haven't been engaged or instructed enough in how to help.

As a programmer, perhaps you've heard the saying "Good, Fast, or Cheap - pick any two". We need to accept that Goblinworks has chosen "Fast and Cheap" for Early Enrollment, with a likely move to "Fast and Good" once they have an income stream able to support that.

[Edit] Understand that "Good" in this context means polished and iterated on enough to be released with a very small number of low impact bugs.

Goblin Squad Member

T7V Jazzlvraz wrote:
AvenaOats wrote:
...PFO's only looking for 10,000 in the 1st 90 days more or less.
Remember also that Goblinworks has to avoid a problem few shops have ever worried about in the gaming industry: too much demand. They don't want everyone and her cousin coming to the game immediately, or they'll upset folks by turning them away; they need small, slow--and, I'm sure they hope, consistent--growth, not a flood.

Yup, they should have that covered with the Month 2 purchase option and just add another month per new crop.

But I would hazard guessing the Month 1 and others who bought into EE since Kickstarter are potentially some of GW most lucrative players if they decide to hang about from month 1? A lot of these are players who "bought into the idea/vision". I'd guess they have patience/tolerance but even that has limits!

Reminds me of Mr. Bean's attempts to "restore a minor smudge"

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Nihimon wrote:

It's a fallacy to assume that bugs will get fixed faster if everyone else stops working on content.

Expecting the game to be "bug free" (whether you're talking about new content being released bug free, or talking about all development on new content being stopped while every last bug gets fixed) is unreasonable.

Here, like above, I do not quite see what you are shooting for. You used one of my quotes from earlier to make a point when it was you who misunderstood the original context and meaning. Nothing that I wrote (that you dug up) contradicts anything that I wrote today.

There probably are contradictory things somewhere. I have been up and down about going into EE. My firm position now is to Fix What's Broken or otherwise nearly useless. If there is a delay for EE, use it that way first. If you need more time to add more content (for EE) after that. Go for it. Just don't pile more poor features on top of poor features.

Now, here we are, with you suggesting that some are suggesting everything goes on hold until each bit of new content is tested by alpha players. That is not what is being suggested. They are a good team. I am sure that they can work on future content while we test released content. I am sure that they can do both in whatever proportions that work best.

They don't need to go back and fix anything until we find that it doesn't work, is a bottleneck, or is just too hard to understand or use. When problems become clear, real effort should be focused on correcting them, IMO.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Xeen wrote:

It is completely reasonable. The game is supposed to be light on content and bug free. That is what was sold. It is not supposed to be incomplete and buggy. Incomplete yes, buggy no.

Despite Ryan's caveats that things might be rocky, that was the pitch given to everyone about EE - that it would be feature-incomplete, but the core systems would work and be fully playable.

Audoucet makes a great point as well that while EE is being sold as "hey, it's NOT done, but you can see us make progress" - the price-point and fact that it's charging a subscription are going to look like a "head-start" to MANY people who will buy it, be shocked at the incomplete and buggy state, and word of mouth will bury any interest in PFO such that it will need to be renamed before a successful OE launch would be possible.

Also, when I spoke of people showing people the game and getting disinterest as a response, I am talking about people who are VERY involved in PFO who are planning on playing at launch, and still have trouble getting new players interested. I'm also speaking of my own experience wherein I sold the hell out of PFO for 3-4 months and no one that I showed it to was at all interested. Many of them were turned off entirely, not believing that what they saw now could EVER become something special. Part of that is that PFO is SO much earlier in development than almost any other game that's been seen by the public (and now I understand why most developers refuse to let players see their games so early in development).

We can stand around and point out how the EE isn't for everyone and it's been said since the start and stand on principles, etc, etc, but reality is that there are a lot of non-active (don't read the forums) purchasers who are going to enter with vastly different expectations of the game and their reviews are not going to be positive, and could do enough damage to the reputation of PFO that it has trouble ever attracting a decent population of players.

Goblin Squad Member

Bringslite, I'm at a loss to understand why you think I'm trying to catch you in a contradiction, or that I'm even contradicting anything you've said, and I'm hesitant to get into a back-and-forth trying to "clarify" the finer nuances of what each person really meant.

It's unreasonable to expect Early Enrollment to be bug free. If you don't have that expectation, then I'm not talking about you.

It's unreasonable to think that ceasing development of new content will make it easier to fix bugs. If you don't think that, then I'm not talking about you.

If you think that nobody expects the game should be bug free, and that nobody thinks Goblinworks should hold off on new content until all the existing bugs are fixed, perhaps you should go back and read some of the prior posts in this thread again.

Goblin Squad Member

Leithlen wrote:
Despite Ryan's caveats that things might be rocky, that was the pitch given to everyone about EE - that it would be feature-incomplete, but the core systems would work and be fully playable.

Can you back that up? Do you have a link to a post where Ryan made that pitch?


.@Daeglin

You pay attention to the arguments???
Have I taught you nothing about sitting back and laughing at drama!!!

Back to the drawing board Daeglin!

Goblin Squad Member

The way I see it is this:

Today/Tomorrow we get Alpha 11. The next two weeks should be about specifically testing the new content, as well as making sure bug fixes are in, and that the UI, and the user experience, are enhanced. I agree with a stable, mostly bug free, less on content, but better on user experience release of EE.

Now, where I see the disconnect in the above arguments is this:

A good many people want what I want, but essentially want GW to pour all their resources that they can into making the above happen. Then there are those saying that isn't exactly going to be the case.

Both arguments above are valid in their own ways:

Essentially, GW can still work on content, while still fixing the UI, User Experience, Stability, and Bugs, because different people at GW do different things. The Stability/Bug Fixing team are different than say the Art Team.

I think the issue can be solved like this:

Please do the above (get those fixes in, and user experience increased), without adding a ton of content that is in excess and will have to be tested too. They can still work on content to meet their deadline, while actually taking the time to test what they have out right now. The difference will come in the size and breadth of each patch, and what will have to test.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I just wanted to say it's been a really good day for Pandas between the blog being released and catching the final out of the World Series.

Back to the debate.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

@ Nihimon

Well because you brought up an earlier post of mine. You do like to do that sort of thing. I don't understand why you would do that, unless it was to make some type of point?

Here is a thought. Was that a mis parse of quote markers and you were not quoting something I had written? Cause that would be just Krazy funny!

All I was trying to do was back up the general gist of Xeen's post. I agreed with it, as I understood it, when I read it.

No one expects there to not be minor bugs. When a game is selling itself on features and those features have major problems, that is not good. How can they be made good if they are not addressed and improved?

If anyone believes that some selling won't need to be done to get to desired EE population, I don't know what else to do there.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nihimon wrote:
It's unreasonable to think that ceasing development of new content will make it easier to fix bugs. If you don't think that, then I'm not talking about you.

That may be true if the same people that are doing the new coding are fixing the bugs in their own code and if none of the new code has any effect on existing systems. If the bug-fixing is a dedicated group though, that is untrue. And, if the new code impacts the existing code, that may or may not be true in either of the above cases. If someone is working on a math problem and someone else changes the way that math is working out, now you have a bug and don't know if it's the same one you had yesterday, or a new one that manifests in the same way. Depending on the code organization process, (and I'm hoping this one isn't true of GW) you may not even be aware that the math has changed since yesterday. It is definitely going to impact the bug fix.

Furthermore, perception wise, if you add a new feature with 10 bugs on the day you fix 10 earlier bugs, the perception to the end user is that things are not getting better.

Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:

It's unreasonable to expect Early Enrollment to be bug free. If you don't have that expectation, then I'm not talking about you.

It's unreasonable to think that ceasing development of new content will make it easier to fix bugs. If you don't think that, then I'm not talking about you.

If you think that nobody expects the game should be bug free, and that nobody thinks Goblinworks should hold off on new content until all the existing bugs are fixed, perhaps you should go back and read some of the prior posts in this thread again.

Of course there will be bugs. That is what programming is about. Fixing those bugs is also part of programming.

BTW, you are mistaken, they were originally going with Good and Cheap. Now it looks like Fast and Cheap.

Let me give some pointers:
Write stage one program, and test it, once good go to stage two
Write stage two program, and test it, if there are any errors correct them, then take a step back to stage one and make sure it is not affected, fix more errors if present, once good go to stage three
Write stage three program, and test it, if there are any errors correct them, then take a step back to stage one and two and make sure they are not affected, fix more errors if present, once good go to stage four
Continue with above till complete

That is how it is done in large scale projects.

@Cheatle, you are correct. Graphics coders are set apart from other coders. As I said in my original post starting this off, they can keep putting in graphics updates. I am just suggesting that they work out their current non graphics bugs. Get it stable... I believe they have realized this which is why the Hold was put in place.

Goblin Squad Member

Leithlen wrote:
Xeen wrote:

It is completely reasonable. The game is supposed to be light on content and bug free. That is what was sold. It is not supposed to be incomplete and buggy. Incomplete yes, buggy no.

Despite Ryan's caveats that things might be rocky, that was the pitch given to everyone about EE - that it would be feature-incomplete, but the core systems would work and be fully playable.

Actually, the quote I saw was that bug-hunting would not be the primary purpose of Early Enrollment, but would still be happening.

Early Enrollment will not be a "beta test" in the classic sense. The objective is not to find and fix bugs - although that will be a part of what happens during Early Enrollment.

Goblin Squad Member

Caldeathe Baequiannia wrote:
Leithlen wrote:
Xeen wrote:

It is completely reasonable. The game is supposed to be light on content and bug free. That is what was sold. It is not supposed to be incomplete and buggy. Incomplete yes, buggy no.

Despite Ryan's caveats that things might be rocky, that was the pitch given to everyone about EE - that it would be feature-incomplete, but the core systems would work and be fully playable.

Actually, the quote I saw was that bug-hunting would not be the primary purpose of Early Enrollment, but would still be happening.

Early Enrollment will not be a "beta test" in the classic sense. The objective is not to find and fix bugs - although that will be a part of what happens during Early Enrollment.

That is more recent, yes.

Goblin Squad Member

Xeen wrote:
Honestly though, after reading your above statements, I question your credentials as a programmer. You may know how to use spreadsheets, but I bet you have barely if ever programmed on a professional level. Slapping garbage together and throwing it out there for sale is not professional.

@Xeen,

You have a communication style that is many times abrasive, insultive and dismissive in a way that is not healthy for a civil conversation.

You regularly bring up very good points, lots of creative ideas/suggestions, and thoughtful comments, but the way you expressive and communicate your ideas is counterproductive and shuts down debate and willingness for people to engage with your ideas.

I wonder if you are doing this deliberately, or are you unaware that you communication style is sabotaging your attempts to communicate your ideas to others?

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Interesting. There is in my memory (possibly faulty) something that Ryan posted. He either flat out wrote or suggested (possibly my incorrect impression) that the goal would be for a minimal feature, pretty much bug free EE, that would be developed as EE progressed.

As I think about it, I have a hard time believing that my memory is sound on that. I don't think that Ryan would write such a thing. Yet the "impression" of a post somewhere, remains.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.

What to expect from Early Access Beta

Right here is what everyone is looking for.

Note, that it says low content and bug free as possible. Note that it also says that the Early Access Beta is not meant to be a bug hunt.

Goblin Squad Member

Xeen wrote:
I was trying to be insultive and dismissive in that post. Simply put that is exactly what Nihimon was doing and I responded in kind. I just happen to not try to hide it.

I do not see what Nihimon wrote that would require such a hostile response. At no point did he attack you personally, dismiss your ideas in a hostile way, or do anything that would be a violation of the forums TOS.

And I am not just referencing THIS specific Nihimon post, I am making reference to your writing style in general.

Even when you are writing in what seems a neutral voice/way, you seem to come across as unnecessarily hostile/aggressive, and that detracts from you ideas and ability to communicate with others and get your voice heard. I LIKE hearing that voice, just not with all the ...negative energy... behind it. :)

Goblin Squad Member

I did some clean up

Goblin Squad Member

Xeen wrote:

What to expect from Early Access Beta

Right here is what everyone is looking for.

Note, that it says low content and bug free as possible. Note that it also says that the Early Access Beta is not meant to be a bug hunt.

From Xeen's link:

Quote:
I can't promise that we can find all the bugs (we never will in a project this size).

There's another quote I'd like to highlight:

Quote:
I'd love to get this sort of information from day one, but it's not really useful data until players are enjoying themselves. That means we need all the basic systems in place and a reasonably bug-free, fun experience.

Yes, the words "bug-free" are right there. But if you read the context, it's pretty clear to me that Ryan is saying he doesn't expect that to be the case from day one.

Goblin Squad Member

Did anyone else loose access to the Alpha Forums? Just curious as it appears I am still in alpha but the alpha forums are from the GW website.

Goblin Squad Member

Ysoac wrote:
Did anyone else loose access to the Alpha Forums? Just curious as it appears I am still in alpha but the alpha forums are from the GW website.

I lost access around 9 am PDT and its still down for me - so you are not the only one.


Maybe they're finally opening the forums up to everyone? Getting the message

"Access denied

You do not have the correct permissions to view the selected page.

If you believe you are seeing this message in error, please contact customer.service@goblinworks.com."

Goblin Squad Member

The Alpha Forums are back for me now. I had been getting "temporarily unavailable" for a while...

Goblin Squad Member

So, I understand Bringslite's confusion earlier. I completely mangled the quote tags in this post.

What it should have looked like:

Nihimon wrote:
Bringslite wrote:
Nihimon wrote:
I don't think it's a good idea to set the expectation that every new content release in Early Enrollment will be free of bugs.
I can't speak for Xeen but I do read that he is not suggesting that new features be bug free when they are released.

First, I didn't quote Xeen because I wasn't really responding to Xeen. This is a sentiment I've expressed a number of times recently in smaller venues, and something I wanted to say here as well.

That said...

Xeen wrote:
Test the living **** out of it before adding another bit.

That seems to suggest that new bits should be fully tested in order to be as bug-free as possible.

Goblinworks has a tremendous amount of work they need to get done in the next year. Expecting them to spend time and resources polishing and testing "the living **** out of" every new content release is not reasonable.

Early Enrollment is not for the masses. It's for fans who understand it's going to be incomplete and buggy, but who want to support the development anyway.

Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:
Xeen wrote:

What to expect from Early Access Beta

Right here is what everyone is looking for.

Note, that it says low content and bug free as possible. Note that it also says that the Early Access Beta is not meant to be a bug hunt.

From Xeen's link:

Quote:
I can't promise that we can find all the bugs (we never will in a project this size).

There's another quote I'd like to highlight:

Quote:
I'd love to get this sort of information from day one, but it's not really useful data until players are enjoying themselves. That means we need all the basic systems in place and a reasonably bug-free, fun experience.
Yes, the words "bug-free" are right there. But if you read the context, it's pretty clear to me that Ryan is saying he doesn't expect that to be the case from day one.

Absolutely. No one should expect "bug free". It is unrealistic.

Mark Kalmes wrote:
Most importantly, we expect to maintain a low bug count throughout the Beta program. There will be a separate phase before Beta, called Alpha, in which we find as many bugs as possible on lots of different test systems and make sure we get those fixed before going into Beta.

Here is where I believe that they made a good decision to go on "hold". I am just hoping they made that decision for those reasons.

Goblin Squad Member

Perhaps they are close to implementing the new forums. Bonny did say that the Alpha forum would at some point be open only to paid alpha accounts.

Or perhaps it's something else....

Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:
The Alpha Forums are back for me now. I had been getting "temporarily unavailable" for a while...

They switched me from unavailable to Access Denied about the time you got back in, Nihimon :-).

Goblin Squad Member

Guys, Ryan did not write that blog.

Goblin Squad Member

Xeen wrote:
Guys, Ryan did not write that blog.

Lol. :)

quote fixed.

Goblin Squad Member

T7V Jazzlvraz wrote:
Nihimon wrote:
The Alpha Forums are back for me now. I had been getting "temporarily unavailable" for a while...
They switched me from unavailable to Access Denied about the time you got back in, Nihimon :-).

Same here, I am now seeing "Access Denied" instead of "temporarily unavailable".

Goblin Squad Member

Oh yea, maybe it is just me, but looks like they updated the account section with everything we are suppose to have....


You're right Cheatle.

Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:

So, I understand Bringslite's confusion earlier. I completely mangled the quote tags in this post.

** spoiler omitted **

Thanks Nihimon. Apologies for taking that wrong at first read. I can do better by asking before assuming I know what people are writing

Goblin Squad Member

I can confirm that both Alpha Accounts can long into the Forums, but both of the Regular Accounts can not.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
Yes, the words "bug-free" are right there. But if you read the context, it's pretty clear to me that Ryan is saying he doesn't expect that to be the case from day one.

Nobody is saying that EE should be bug free. We expect there will be bugs.

What we should also expect is that basic functionality of the added features works.

There is a big difference between a bug, and a critical path failure.

Example:

Bug example: (scenario) imagine being in a tower capture space, and it shows the PvP icon above the minimap is gray, despite the tower being in capture availability mode. I am still able to cap the tower. So a small glitch, but gameplay still possible.

Critical path failure: (scenario) imagine being in a tower capture space, the icon for pvp timer above minimap shows a negative value below 0, effectively meaning the pvp window countdown timer is going to negative and not releasing pvp lock. I cannot cap the tower, ever. I cannot play the game (component). (This has happened to towers in Alpha just last week.)

See the difference?

It is reasonable for us to expect stuff like the "bug" example in EE. Weird stuff happens, and it will.

In the second example, when a core, critical path feature of gameplay just plain asplodes, that means that Q/A has not been nearly as exhaustive as it needed to be, and that kind of failure is not acceptable when you are putting your product out there for potential review.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Leithlen wrote:
Audoucet makes a great point as well that while EE is being sold as "hey, it's NOT done, but you can see us make progress" - the price-point and fact that it's charging a subscription are going to look like a "head-start" to MANY people who will buy it, be shocked at the incomplete and buggy state, and word of mouth will bury any interest in PFO such that it will need to be renamed before a successful OE launch would be possible.

That is actually a good idea, but the other way around. To call EE something like "Pathfinder : The Prequel", and OE "Pathfinder Online". That is kinda what LiF did with "LiF:YO". You know clearly that you are not buying PFO, but PFP.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.

From the blog:
"During this period members of the team who are not working on server performance will continue to polish other features already deployed in our Alpha Test. Updates to the Alpha will continue both to roll out these polished feature iterations and to test server capacity improvements. The Alpha will remain in progress until we are ready to exit the "hold"."

My take away from that is they are going to do two things going forward: polish existing features, and improve stability/performance. I would think if they were planning on doing something else, e.g. adding new content, Ryan would have said that.

Squashing bugs and making the company function/AH work well sounds like a good use of the "hold" time.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Audoucet wrote:
Leithlen wrote:
Audoucet makes a great point as well that while EE is being sold as "hey, it's NOT done, but you can see us make progress" - the price-point and fact that it's charging a subscription are going to look like a "head-start" to MANY people who will buy it, be shocked at the incomplete and buggy state, and word of mouth will bury any interest in PFO such that it will need to be renamed before a successful OE launch would be possible.
That is actually a good idea, but the other way around. To call EE something like "Pathfinder : The Prequel", and OE "Pathfinder Online". That is kinda what LiF did with "LiF:YO". You know clearly that you are not buying PFO, but PFP.

That is the dumbest, most-

Wait. Audoucet posted something good? Damn, it has been months. Sorry, caught me out of position.

I actually love this idea. It could neatly short-circuit the perception concerns that have been raised (repeatedly, at length, ad nauseum) by several people, and also avoids the beta/not beta discussion.

101 to 150 of 195 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Licensed Products / Digital Games / Pathfinder Online / Goblinworks Blog: Early Enrollment "Hold" All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.