Metabaron's page

You have a thesis: it is more interesting to fight a worthy opponent. They have an antithesis: it is not interesting to be meaninglessly murdered. The proposition here is that there is a synthesis that can be designed that will satisfactorily solve the disagreement and result in a superior game that can eventually and gradually be good for all of us.

My objective is to try and facilitate the expression of just such a solution. I think it is in all our interests to do the same, because it could vault PvP into a new paradigm of excellence.

I find your embrace of dialectics disturbing.

If the current state of the western world is to provide a historical and empirical example then I think it is the opposite that will be true.

Nonetheless reading through the blog it seems the system of incentives and punishment in a free setting is working theoretically, this is one of the reasons I want so badly to pay in order to get into alpha to be there in game when the thesis is put to the test and will evolve into your synthesis.

The analogy to Hobbes hypethetical "state of nature" has probably been used a few times to describe a total free pvp game, then again the opposite of the carebears wet dream of a pve utopia sounds like a free mans nightmare.

No matter if the game flops or not this will certainly be interesting, and my money is literally on the hope that it will become a new paradigm of excellence.

IMO, the MMO market is saturated, despite a rapid growing player base with a change in social paradigm making gaming the norm and a expanding high speed internett access the mmo supply is exceeding demand. Seems there is 3-5 high profile theme park MMO released every year, most of which basicly lose 90% of its player base 2-3 months after release.

I can't even remember half of the hyped theme park mmo's that were released this year on steam.

A mmo model that I find interesting that has been able to keep itself growing with only pvp and almost devoid of social interaction is Mechwarrior Online. It's forums is filled with people who hate the developers for not fullfilling the promised faction warfare and other demands, but the game is competitive, gives players many customization options, got progression and got great gameplay. This is one reason I'm liking pathfinder, a game doesn't need to have everything ready at launch if the core gameplay is fun and competitive.

Its good to at least have some back up games if God forbid Pathfinder Online takes a Generals 2 turn of event... Everything looks good, alpha is fun and then BAM! Development is shutdown while EA executives laughs while torturing puppies.

Pathfinder online has a adventurer appeal to me that no other upcoming mmo has. Star Citizens is scifi and Eternal Crusade will be more like planetside 2 than a traditional mmo.

Another thing pathfinder has which no of the other mmo's has is the guts to really make a true free sandbox mmo, camelot unchained still has the Elder Scrolls online formula. The new Everquest looks beautiful and I think will be interesting, but for longevity I think Pathfinder will survive all the other fantasy sandbox mmo's just because it got more liberty for players than all the other competitors from what they have said, I just hope they are able to implement it.