| BitterClinger |
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
...one of the most superficial criticisms of PFO was that they took a coop TT game and turned it into a FFA PvP game.
Far from superficial, the criticism speaks to the core of the Pathfinder brand and consumer expectations.
When consumers who are familiar with the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game see the Pathfinder logo, a few associations may come to mind:
- d20 Ruleset
- Character-based Progression
- Group-based Co-op Gameplay
The academic discussions about the MMORPG market and MMORPG design are interesting, but not particularly relevant to the topic, which is the insurmountable dissonance between the branding of this game and the content of this game.
If I had an open world PVP game, I would not choose a name like "Pathfinder" or "Dungeons & Dragons". Heck, might as well call it "Co-op Adventures" and immediately lose any appeal it might have to exactly the kind of game players I want to attract.
Product names and brand names mean something. Let's look at some PVP games:
- Ultima Online
- Mortal Online
- Asheron's Call-Darktide
- Dark Age of Camelot
- Shadowbane
- EVE Online
- Darkfall Online
- Crowfall
- Age of Conan Unchained
- Camelot Unchained
Now, I'm not suggesting they should change the game mechanics at all. I'm suggesting they should remove Pathfinder from the name and rebrand it. It's not my area of expertise, but I would recommend something like "Eventide" or "Shadow's Call".
If Paizo then decides that they want a Pathfinder branded video game, they can make something that more closely aligns with the brand and has a broader appeal to their existing market.
Finally, kudos to Bluddwolf for the best comment in the thread:
If it were a WOW clone, or a clone of just about anything else, it would have been more successful.
No truer words were ever spoken, or something like that.