AttilaKhan's page

Organized Play Member. 5 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


KoTC Edam Neadenil wrote:
AttilaKhan wrote:

Outside in the market there are games like EVE Online that show how a Sanbox Game is. Here I'm reading about many limitations that make no sense.

EVE is not really a full sandbox except in the limited sense that the large nullsec player groups are able to lobby CCP and have the game changed to suit their own interests. There is substantial dev interference in the running of EVE, generally in the name of "balancing".

Yes, I understand what do you mean about EVE.

We should just consider EVE like a point to start from and do better.
If well managed, advised and discussed Pathfinder Online has the numbers to draw peoples not only from the "aficionados" but even from games like EVE, Minecraft, Guild Wars and Warcraft.

KotC - Erian El'ranelen wrote:
Hi AttilaKhan. It looks like you might be new. I'd encourage reading up on the blogs to understand the current War of Towers approach versus the long-term game options. What you describe will, eventually, be very like what PFO delivers. Until they get the systems nailed down, the WoT gives us some things to do and simultaneously test iterative functionality roll-out.

Thanks God Erian.

I think the idea of creating a Sanbox game in fantasy landscape like pathfinder is a brilliant idea.
IF you tell me that the setting of the War of Towers is something like a temporary development to test the basic functions of the game, then the better :) !

A settlemente has a template for trainer.
Some settlement will have only craft skill training.
Towers that limits the training ???

This is supposed to be a Sandbox Game ?
I don't think so guys.

Outside in the market there are games like EVE Online that show how a Sanbox Game is. Here I'm reading about many limitations that make no sense.

In a player driven market every node should be able to offer potentially every trade goods a player is willing to produce and sell.
The only limitations should come from the raw resources available inside the territory.

I do not even understand why there are trainers ! What's the point of it !
Then why not a player can't another player feats or skills ?

The idea of settlements, production, gathering and facilities was brilliant...but what is following is something really pointless.

Duffy wrote:
The game is being heavily designed to encourage building relationships with both neighbors and farther away entities (at least until you have enough population to conquer or found new settlements), this is just the tip of it. I would expect more choices like this in the long run as specializations and factions start getting rolled out down the line.

Forcing a Sandbox game in this way will lead the game to be a failure.

BrotherZael wrote:
@Avena. Little to no initial economy in my belief. Part of this EE and the slow build is so that we have time to build and establish the economy, to determine prices, goods, and market values.

Totally agree with you.

At most the NPC market should provide really basical goods such as rations, rope and stuff like that, all produced by commoner or some expert, and yet this production should be limited for an arc of time till it replenish. Lack of goods stimulate the player to produce it and sell it at the price they wish too.
This must be true starting from a player that decide to mine iron to produce a dagger.
Pathfinder is supposed to be a Sanbox game, do it in another way and the project will simply fail.