Your experience with DAOC was clearly quite different than mine at launch. No one, and I do mean no one, on my server was even remotely interested in exploring to find anywhere higher than about 25 to level in non PVP, and insisted on immediately jumping in to RvR.
Which meant that, given at launch a group in that game was pretty much necessary to level with any real efficiency, it meant that yes, you were indeed forced into RVR if you wanted to play, unless killing a few mobs an hour by yourself was a "good time".
The saddening inability of the vast majority of people to grasp this concept led to the decline of innovation we saw in the past few years and has finally caused most games to be a mind numbing affair of logging in, queing up, running an instance with 4 complete strangers and log off in order to get 5% of the points needed to buy medium gear that will be wholly worthless in 6 months.
This has nothing to do with people being "unable to grasp this concept", and everything to do with the undeniable mind-blowing success of WoW in the MMORPG genre. It's subscriber numbers blew every game that existed, or was even created afterwords, out of the water. Of course, the attitude of people has always been to try to take what works and improve on it, to try to replicate the success of the original.
Now, companies are finally starting to realize that while they can replicate the systems of wow, and the gameplay, they can't replicate the key factors of WoW's success: It was the right game, at the right time, and accessible to the masses. WoW is, never was, and never will be a "great game". It is a thoroughly and completely average game, with enough content to keep people interested over long periods of time. Suffice to say, they've mastered the art of finding out just how long the stick they attach the carrot to has to be. But it was the *right* game for the time, and so it exploded. Now, it has the ultimate edge in keeping high subscriber numbers: complacency. People are just "happy enough" to stick with it.
Get yourself a guild man and you will be fine, run around solo and you will die. No risk no fun!
Oh, rest assured I already have one. We're usually over 200 strong on the day of the formal release, and on the day it comes out, I can promise you, it will most likely be hated.
Goblin Squad Member
|
...Now, companies are finally starting to realize that while they can replicate the systems of wow, and the gameplay, they can't replicate the key factors of WoW's success: It was the right game, at the right time, and accessible to the masses. WoW is, never was, and never will be a "great game"...
Amen.
So why did you advocate for PFO to be more like WoW than like EvE?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, rest assured I already have one. We're usually over 200 strong on the day of the formal release, and on the day it comes out, I can promise you, it will most likely be hated.
Oh great. So Goon Swarm will be playing this game. Can you guys at least contribute more to the kickstarter?
So why did you advocate for PFO to be more like WoW than like EvE?
Why do you assume my dislike for PVP automatically means I want the game to be like WoW? That's like saying that just because I dislike chicken, I must be a vegetarian. There are plenty of other types of meat that I enjoy eating, I just don't like that one type.
Andius: Goons play most, if not all, MMO games. It should always be an assumed that "Goons will play <x>". As for why more haven't contributed, I'd suspect that it because right now the return on investment is rather pathetic. Unless you're a dire-hard fan of the Pathfinder world and absolutely have to be in day one, it's not worth it to invest in a level that grants early access right now, considering the paid beta structure. Like all kickstarters, I'm sure they'll increase the benefits later on, but this is no Reaper Bones kickstarter at the moment.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
You have games like WoW, (theoretical) games like 'WoW done right', and sandbox games, and (theoretical) 'sandbox done right' games. In a continuum, in that order. I want that to move away from WoW and 'WoW done right' and toward 'sandbox done right'.
That means I want to avoid some things that would exist if WoW were shifted toward being a sandbox game. Not because they wouldn't improve WoW, but because I don't believe WoW (or Eve) are starting points; they are only points of comparison.
With a few conservative assumptions, buying in now provably makes economic sense if you are economically rational, not even counting any benefit from early enrollment, but only that one is sufficiently certain that one will buy and subscribe for at least four months.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Oh, rest assured I already have one. We're usually over 200 strong on the day of the formal release, and on the day it comes out, I can promise you, it will most likely be hated.
I rest assured that one person will likely be hated :)
|
There is plenty of open space for more then just themepark and sandbox.
I woulld really like to have a game with some quests and storylines and plenty of places to explore and sandbox type things, and have all that be solo-able, because I like running into strangers out in wilds, but I don't really like grouping, I have never had a grouping experience that I enjoyed in an mmo, though I have enjoyed my random encounters with strangers.
So I guess I like a middleground solo game where I can unexpectedly meet other players at any time, perhaps by follow the trail of dead monsters.
I don't think that falls on the themepark sandbox continuum described above, and I don't believe such a game exists, therefore I have to settle for a game that does exist, which makes me one of those players that doesn't play the way you think they should play to succeed.
@Micman
I personally think that solo is greater risk then grouping but you claim solo equals death then follow up with "no risk no fun" how is running around in a group risky? It is clear that running around solo is far riskier then in a group, therefore someone who states that playing solo is bad, clearly doesn't like risk.
Now if only a game would support both playstyles.
Note: Risk = the possiblity of failure = little chance to fail means little risk
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I find grouping in sandbox games drastically more enjoyable because you don't have a set number of people you need. It's just "Hey guys. I'm going to make a sweep of humanlands(major starter area) for reds(Random player killers). Who wants to come?" Or "I'm taking the boat to go kill a kracken! Who's coming?" You can take everyone of every level who wants to come because there is no limitation. Makes grouping a lot more fun IMO.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For me it's hard to group because of playstyle, I "smell every rose" and enjoy the scenery, check the loots, even the minor ones, but most everyone I have ever played with bullrushed through, no one ever enjoyed the surroundings or how cool the glass floor was, the bloopers of missing surfaces in the cracks, they only jumped from monster to monster, stopping only to recover hp/mana. Even in sandbox games, the goal may not be npc given but they are still going for a goal and they don't "smell the flowers."
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I find grouping in sandbox games drastically more enjoyable because you don't have a set number of people you need. It's just "Hey guys. I'm going to make a sweep of humanlands(major starter area) for reds(Random player killers). Who wants to come?" Or "I'm taking the boat to go kill a kracken! Who's coming?" You can take everyone of every level who wants to come because there is no limitation. Makes grouping a lot more fun IMO.
I'll never forget my first Greater Krayt Dragon Hunt in Star Wars Galaxies. I organized the hunt, got a solid half of my guild going, and every starport and shuttleport on the way there, we let people know the plan. We had a veritable *mob* of players by the time we hit the canyon where they are known to roam. With no readily available respawns and limited healers who could resurrect characters, it was intense. We managed to kill two of them before we got scattered when a second one joined the one we were working on. But the sheer chaos and sense of community where everyone joined in on a random event, thats what I love about sandbox. Not waiting in lines for a raid, not trying to take the perfect most optimized group of X players, its about getting a bunch of people together and making it work.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I can see your point. It is nice to just stop, slow down, and take your time to really fully explore things sometimes. And this is really best done by yourself or 1-2 like minded people. Big group activities are not about smelling roses.
I do know however I've done a lot of solo exploration in sandbox games. I think even without theme park elements there will be plenty of opportunity to smell the roses when you aren't out laying waste enemy players or epic enemies. I don't think most of the people saying you can't solo in sandboxes are actually sandbox vets. It's easier to group, there aren't too many drawbacks to grouping, and grouping leaves you safer if you get attacked by players... but generally there are always challenges that can be easily soloed, because not everyone wants to group 100% of the time.
My only suggestion to you is that you play a class with stealth, so you can just hide if you run into a group of players.
I'm really interested to see how quests and dungeons do end up fitting in though.
|
|
Yep, getting the risk-reward ratio for soloers right is difficult however and is one of my concerns. It is kinda sad to defeat a dungeon solo then get little more then I would have gotten grouping.
Of course that was one complaint I had about DDO, the bosses on some dungeons were not possible solo. I would carefully clear out the entire dungeon and get to the boss to find that it's 10 levels higher than me and be completely unable to even touch the boss. (All because I went in on hard just find a challenge for a dungeon rated for a group of my level).
Edit;
I do often play stealth-mages but I have yet to be able to escape from combat in any mmo other then DDO (which I couldn't do unless I went invisible) so I hope they change that.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Micman
I personally think that solo is greater risk then grouping but you claim solo equals death then follow up with "no risk no fun" how is running around in a group risky?
That wasn't what I ment.
Without risk there is no ingame reason to group. Some people may group anyways but most wont. Also risk is what makes the game fun instead of being endlessy repetitive and shallow.
Sooo, without risk there is no fun and if someone want to lessen the risk he should find some good buddies that he can depend on and group.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Captain Marsh
Don't worry, the only person at Paizo that is working on PFO is Lisa Stevens, the Goblinworks COO. Goblinworks is a development studio created just for making this game.
Goblinworks has licensed the Pathfinder world and while the team does work near Paizo headquarters and does meet with their representatives, it is to make sure that the Pathfinder license is being used correctly in the game they are designing. Many of them do not have experience with the Pathfinder brand, after all.
It has already been stated that the reason the River Kingdoms area was chosen for the game is so that Goblinworks would have some freedom to shape the area, as this area is not incredibly detailed yet. I believe that it has also been stated that things from the MMO will not bleed back into the tabletop RPG, but that Goblinworks may build on new story developments in the TT.
Thanks for the well wishes!
|
Goblinworks Lead Game Designer
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Taking for granted that the obvious Lawfullness grinding hole is fixed...
Is there any plan for supporting career criminal characters, such as professional commerce raiders? (Either freelance or with a sponsoring group)?
Are there areas out in the wilderness, or player-controlled areas, where the penalties will be relaxed even outside of declared war?
I assume by professional commerce raiders you mean bandits?
I meant people hired for the specific purpose of disrupting other people's transportation, part of [urll=http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2p7ci?Goblinworks-Blog-I-Can-See-for-Miles#48]this scenario[/url].
The RL equivalent would be privateers with a letter of Marque attacking merchant ships ca. 1700-1850. It might be hard to differentiate the behavior of privateers and pirates without some kind of official sanctioned feature.
If those commerce raiders aren't welcome in some segments of polite society, I'm fine with that. What I object to is making it essentially impossible for them to keep up with the power curve of polite society, because they fill a role that is important in the development of emergent behavior.
On another note, you mention that it will be nontrivial to determine the alignment of someone you meet, and also that characters will have an effect on the alignment of settlements that they are members of. Is it intended that the leaders of the settlement know the cause of their settlement's alignment shifts? Will expelling the unaligned members reverse the alignment change?
Oh, privateers, totally possible. Sure, you probably won't have many paladins or monks (since they must be lawful) in your group, bgut you can totally kill people when paid to. Actually I could totally see a chaotic or neutral venture company that contacts settlements at war, offering to join up so all that settlement's enemies become consequence free (or at least reduced) targets to the venture company, becoming very analogous to a letter of marque. Granted the settlement may not want the venture company around long term since it drags down the alignment of the settlement, but short term some warm bodies willing to do terrible things can be really useful.
Right now, I've got it written up that a settlement leader would know who is tanking his settlement's alignment, but I still want to think on that. Kicking people out should refigure the settlement's alignment without the removed members in the math.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It's simply that I play Pathfinder because it's a fantastic table-top social experience.I have no interest in a digital/on-line experience of this game.
The Pathfinder name will be in theme and flavor only. The game mechanics will be completely different. It wouldn't work if they weren't.
Pathfinder online can only bring more attention and resources to the table-top version. MMORPG's are much more popular nowadays. I bought the Pathfinder beginner box only to read the materials since I don't table-top anymore.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The Pathfinder name will be in theme and flavor only. The game mechanics will be completely different. It wouldn't work if they weren't.Pathfinder online can only bring more attention and resources to the table-top version. MMORPG's are much more popular nowadays. I bought the Pathfinder beginner box only to read the materials since I don't table-top anymore.
I think it will be more than theme and flavor. I mean some of what I have read is based off the rules in some ways. I mean the 6 second stamina system reflects the round mechanics as a good example. Or atleast how i understood it.
|
|
...
The game mechanics will be completely different. It wouldn't work if they weren't.
...
Not true, the mechanics could be kept close to the PnP, DDO as an example, it could have been done better, but it shows that it's possible. Doesn't make those mechanics optimal for online however, that and certain OGL issues are probably why the are changing mechanics so much.
I am one of those that has had a bad experience with PVP. I am really excited about this game and willing to give PVP a try again. Ultima Online just ruined it for me.... Yeah I know that was ancient history, but I can tell you Player Killers killed that game for me.
I see GW's vision and get it, I just hope they can follow through with keeping the majority of griefing out of the game. I know they will not be able to abolish all of it... I just hope they can put a great big dent in it! =)
Valinar
I wanted to add a hearty "hear, hear!" to Valinar's post. I've also been burned by griefing in other games (most recently, WoW). I've enjoyed - though been bad at - large-scale PvP in other games, most notably DAoC's RvR system, and am willing to try (and probably be terrible at) PvP again. But the open-PvP model is going to cost GW some backers unless the player-griefing aspect is specifically, and publicly, addressed. It feels like bullying, it's not fun, and people who have been burned enough times by it will be leery of trying it again.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hey in Age of Conan I witnessed forst hand how it's not about the rules, it's about the players. The Hyperborea server had some griefing, and the PvP'ers dominated most of the battle keeps over the Rp'ers, but overall there was a very positive Rp-PvP experience to be had with a good dozen guilds or so engaging in PvP that was RP driven.
Then the server merged into Cimmeria where the Rp'ers hid in taverns and the ganking was every bit as harsh as any other pure PvP server.
Same set of rules. Different populations. The game mechanics help, but at the end of the day it's the type of players that make an online game what it is.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...The game mechanics will be completely different. It wouldn't work if they weren't.
...
Not true, the mechanics could be kept close to the PnP, DDO as an example, it could have been done better, but it shows that it's possible. Doesn't make those mechanics optimal for online however, that and certain OGL issues are probably why the are changing mechanics so much.
This is why I'm not even interested in looking at DDO. I can't believe game developers would be so naive to believe a ruleset designed for PNP would work for an MMORPG. It's also the reason why so many MMORPG's are so mediocre, they've taken too much from PNP and single player RPGs instead of designing them from scratch as an MMORPG.
I'm sure there will be bits and pieces of mechanics from Pathfinder PNP, but for the most part it will be a completely redesigned core system with all the flavor from the Pathfinder universe.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...The game mechanics help, but at the end of the day it's the type of players that make an online game what it is.
Yeah, this.
One thing to avoid is boredom. Many people are not out to cause other players grief but when bored people can become idiots when the price for doing so is low.
Most boredom comes weither from nothing more to do (like in UO at the end) or from the extremly mind numbing levelling (like in early WoW).
The other thing is giving players who get a thrill from taking on other players outside a boring artifical arena a possibility to do that without resorting to griefing.
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
This is why I'm not even interested in looking at DDO. I can't believe game developers would be so naive to believe a ruleset designed for PNP would work for an MMORPG.
DDO doesn't use D20 rules. It's got a D20 nomenclature and a D20 "look" but the rules are real-time MMO systems like virtually every MMO on the market.
|
|
Actually, despite being real time, many of the rules are the same. You get the same bonuses and penalties based on stats and spells, the same same d20 rolls, the same sneak attack, the same arcane armor failure chance. These are basic rules that have been kept, the basic mechanic of DnD is the d20 roll, add modifiers, not rounds. Being turn based is not the primary mechanic, it is just used as the most efficient method for PnP.
About the only major change is that it is real time with no reference to the 6 second rounds, which is a good for an mmo (and reality).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Actually, despite being real time, many of the rules are the same. You get the same bonuses and penalties based on stats and spells, the same same d20 rolls, the same sneak attack, the same arcane armor failure chance. These are basic rules that have been kept, the basic mechanic of DnD is the d20 roll, add modifiers, not rounds. Being turn based is not the primary mechanic, it is just used as the most efficient method for PnP.
About the only major change is that it is real time with no reference to the 6 second rounds, which is a good for an mmo (and reality).
This I do mostly agree with, I do however have to make one point, I don't think it is so much the general mechanics that would hinder GW in making a closer to P&P, as the sandbox and PVP nature of things.
DDO did many things well, it probably is my favorate theme park. It runs it's instances and pre-written stories better than most theme parks do, and to an extent does a pretty good job of eliminating the between stories grind. However for the things GW wants to do, it would fail miserably.
DDO's PVP, is atrocious, even the biggest fans of DDO agree with this. The mechanics of P&P, make very unfun and unbalanced PVP. Enter in a tavern brawl as a barbarian... 1 second after you are stuck in an irrisistable dance, then petrified. For low levels if you don't have the save or die/save or be CCed (or the no save but be CCed such as irresistable dance), you've lost before setting foot in the area, if you have them... then it's first shot = winner. This is more or less true of the P&P game as well.
world building etc... also kind of fails in the P&P game, beyond very very hands on DMing, which just doesn't work when you permit
A. Players who have only concern of personal gain, couldn't care less of the impact on other players or the world
B. a 100:1 GM/player ratio or worse.
|
|
I certainly agree. I wasn't really advocating sticking to the book as close as possible, (though I would like to stay close in most regards, but not all of them) I was merely pointing out that sticking close to PnP rules is very possible and can be done well.
It was a response to someone who refused to look at DDO because they couldn't believe it had any chance of being decent due to the base on the PnP ruleset.
Though I would rate the PvP a for larger reason then sandbox, to stray from the rules of PnP.
Either way I do agree it makes a better themepark /non-PvP game, which can be fun sometimes, like when I'm tired and want to follow a story for a while (which happens, sometimes I'm in a mood for themepark, sometimes for sandbox.) I am playing Mass Effect 3 for example and I often wish I could be playing with a couple of my Halo friends rather then myself and a computer. (I wonder if they'll let me design Mass Effect Online, I have some wonderfull ideas for it :D)