Dissapointment Among the Silent

[cipher_nemo]

Of the supporters who donated money to one of the Kickstarter projects, I am among the mostly silent who are extremely disappointed. Silent because I don't participate much in the community, and disappointed because of where Goblinworks is taking Pathfinder Online.

It's becoming a project that focuses on PvP between settlements instead of the sandbox ideas that were originally marketed.

I'm married, I work full time, I have a busy life outside of gaming. I enjoyed the original Goblinworks updates of a sandbox game, but have absolutely no time to play a sandbox MMO competitively within a company/settlement. That's not what I donated for, and that's not what I can or even want to participate in.

As a community you may agree or disagree, but I just wanted to put my voice out there for Paizo/Golbinworks. I'm one of the mostly silent who rarely posts here. How many more mostly silent donators are disappointed?

[T7V Jazzlvraz]

I'm sorry to hear of your disappointment. I'm not completely certain what a sandbox that we already knew wouldn't have the much-more-common theme-park elements would include that PFO doesn't, and I'd like to hear more about what you're seeking.

Please don't think that all Settlements will have onerous lists of requirements for you to meet in order to be a member. It sounds, to me, as if there's room for a wide variety of play-styles and time-commitments in the Settlements on offer, and more are bound to come.

The only place I have concerns--which I've expressed more than once here on the boards--is for folks like yourself, who may find, for example, they have only 20 minutes for a play-session, or want to un-wind and relax after work. I've questioned whether there will be things they can do to feel a sense of accomplishment in such a short window, or to feel relaxed in what sounds as if it could generally be quite a tense environment; the conversation among us all is on-going.

Crowdforging may also, as you've obviously recognised, give you the chance to make your case and gain support from this community. I hope you find it as welcoming--almost always--as I have.

Please continue to contribute your voice, and invite others who feel the same to join you.

[TEO Roughshod]

What parts are you interested in?

I don't have time to play competitively PvP wise either. I've made it clear in my own guild that I'm not in the PvP wing and so have others to their respective guilds.

There are a lot of crafting-and-building only players and groups forming up all over the place. It isn't just all about PvP, it is just that PvP is the driving engine of consumption that gives us sandbox crafters something to produce towards. Without PvP no one would need to buy our stuff very often.

[Caldeathe Baequiannia]

I think it's one of the inherent dangers of pre-supporting something, and of assumptions and preconceptions. I'm not far off from your feeling, though I have the advantage that I looked at the pdf offerings as being mostly worth what I put in. I also am married and work full time, and my wife is confined to a wheelchair. I devote a lot of energy to the charity that best supports research into her condition. I too fear every day that I will log in to find my home a smoking ruin and decide it's not worth it.

I'm a bit more pragmatic, though. The developers owe me nothing but what they promised, and if I was incapable of seeing exactly what they were promising me, that's at least as much my fault as theirs. If I'd been an online gamer before PFOnline, I'd probably have had a better idea of what was coming, or maybe not. In any event, I've decided to ride it out and see if I can have fun. I hope so.

Still, they aren't making it for us, they're making it for themselves. Consider it a bit like contributing code to a Linux variation. Our contribution gives us a voice, but the thousands of other people who are contributing get a voice too, and they are under no obligation to choose our voice as the one that gets what we want. We decided to come along for the ride, and if we don't like the direction they are going, we can get out at any time. I'd guess there are lots of people around who would happily purchase the incentives we are owed, probably even for as much as we donated. They might even be perfectly content to forgo the physical and pdf rewards, just for the chance to get in to EE and have a Destiny's Twin.

In fact I know at least one right now, so I think you have an easy out if you really want it.

Good luck.

[White Tiger in the North]

Hi Cipher, since you don't have private contacts turned on, may I ask if you are interested in transferring your account? I'd happily receive a message about what you put in and whether I might take it over.

[<Magistry> Toombstone]

Hopefully, the reputation system will be a strong enough consequence against random PvP so that you can enjoy the playstyle you like in PFO. There are a number of settlements who focus on non-PvP pursuits, and whose PvP-interested membership will endeavor to allow players uninterested in PvP to avoid it as much as possible.
I sympathize with your point of view though, as PvP does seem to have a significant role in PFO.

[Hark]

Titles that come up a lot when people think Sandbox are Grand Theft Auto and Minecraft. Both are very different kinds of sandboxes. PFO is still a sandbox, but for people that expected a different kind of sandbox it can be upsetting.

[<Kabal> Sunnfire]

Cipher if you would like to talk to one of my guild mates that had the same kind of dilemma, I would imagine you might be able to rekindle some of your hope for the game.

You have PM's turned off but you can send some contact info over and I will hook the two of you up.

[FMS Quietus]

I'm curious what the difference was. I didn't support the first kickstarter, but the game's focus seems to be right in line with the second kickstarter. I also don't put much stake in the silent majority in relation to why they are silent. I think there are plenty of reasons as to why they aren't active here.

[T7V Jazzlvraz]

Unfortunately, Quietus, simple inertia is all-too-common an explanation for silence. Some lurk and don't participate, but I'd not be surprised if the vast majority don't even visit the boards.

One hopes they read the blog-updates, but I'd not put money on the quantity nor the frequency there either.

[Guurzak]

Eve has enough PVE content in High Sec zones that someone who wants to just log in for a while and run some missions or mine some asteroids in near-perfect safety can do so. You won't have the highest income/hour and you'll miss out on a lot of what the game can do, but there are plenty of people who play that way some or all of the time and enjoy it.

High Sec also provided a necessary regrouping and recovering zone for corps which lost badly and needed to catch their breath before venturing back into the wars.

I think it'll be important for PFO to offer a similar experience. If a player wants to just hang out in the 30ish protected hexes around Thornkeep or the 30ish protected hexes around Fort Inevitable, there should be to do there to make that a sustainable playstyle for people who aren't interested in venturing out into 0.0 space, or for people who need a breather. If 30's not enough, maybe they can add more protected hexes, or additional instanced content as dungeons within the existing hexes.

NPC towns need to be more than just the place your new character spawns and levels up to 5. They need to be able to offer careerlong support for players like cipher_nemo who aren't interested in the same kind of risk/reward levels as the more aggressive members of the player base.

["The Goodfellow"]

Coming from one of the more avid PVPers expected to join PFO, I wanted to echo what some of the others have said here. As a sandbox MMO, you can do nearly anything your heart and imagination can desire. There will be PVP in the game, the only way to do without is to make it single player game. However, remember that there are roles and professions that will minimize your exposure to PVP, there is also the ability to ally yourself with those more PVP oriented for protection.

The point I am getting at, and please don't take this as insulting or hostile in anyway, there are ways around the PVP if you look for them, and even if you can't avoid it 100%, then you can minimize it. This is a game designed to play with friends. Solo play is possible, but much more dangerous. If you embrace the "play with friends" idea, then hire protection when you trade or harvest, stay inside a town with a strong PVP military to craft, discuss politics with nations while remaining a humble tavern keeper. There are ways to play short, sporadic sessions, and remain away from the PVP action if that is your desire.

As for the "issue": with settlement v settlement warfare being a major thing in PFO, you can contribute without being on 18 hours a day and being s soldier on the front lines. Crafting and refining duties will be needed and I don't think they will require massive time slots of in game playtime. I know a lot of the focus seams to be "if you don't want to PVP, be a crafter." but at this point in time, that is all we know for sure is a minimal PVP role. There might be others when EE gets here and surely by the time OE.

[Guurzak]

In fact, we know that settlements will need players/companies who focus on suppressing monster incursions and claiming the artifact rewards from such. So there are important non-PVP roles which are more than just crafting weapons for the PVPers.

[AvenaOats]

@OP: I'm not sure how much time I'll have over the next few years and how competitive I want to be. Those are unknowns due to circumstance and the actual gameplay.

My back-up strategy is that I have a particular character concept that I think I'd enjoy bringing to the PFO game world. And here's where I think the PFO design has potential.

It's broken down into:

1. Exploration
2. Adventure
3. Development
4. Dominion.

All this is to enable a virtual world that is run by players actually performing roles for functional in-game reasons and hence motivated to do so as opposed to whimsically doing so.

As that grows more niches ideally are created with more types of character concepts possibly becoming relevant to that process. In the beginning it will be sharp margins to keep a group viable and mainly it seems more opportunity for 4., but over time I think if 4. succeeds and GW can add more, then I see more of the others becoming possible.

It may take time for those things to develop. But in the meantime I think different settlement cultures and correspondences will develop and that will an interesting online mmo community hopefully with the rep/alignment and so on operating.

We'll see, "Rome wasn't built in a day". :)

[Tyncale]

The community keeps amazing me. :)

[TEO Cheatle]

If you stay silent, you are just that, there have been months and months of ideas rolling around these forums. The Devs have used quite a few ideas of the community, and took the pulse of those active here to steer the game.

Hell, Ryan, Stephen, and Tork point blank answered a ton of questions I had. The dev team we have is probably one of the top 3 in customer support and communication. There is a reason a lot of games lose tons of members, and that is because this is a two way street, not just you, but thousands of others are silent too.

Now, as for your situation, and as far as I have been reading and keeping check on this game since late 2012/early 2013....I have to say, what were you expecting? This is the general direction this game has been going in for almost two years.

I realize it might be low on content for those that only have short periods of time to play, but realistically speaking I don't think I have played an MMO, thempark or sandbox, that has much content for under 30 mins to an hour.

I would like to hear more of what you were thinking, because at this point, your OP is vague of the direction you assumed the game would go, as well as what you wanted out of the game.

[Kryzbyn]

Will it be possible to play a character that's wholely unaffiliated?
In an existing MMO, you can 'solo' to an extent and never have to join a guild to progress.
Can the same be said of PFO?

[Bringslite of Fidelis]

@ cipher_nemo

Perfectly understand your point of view. There is an impression that violent conflict will be everywhere and constant. While we all beat drums and thump chests here, encouraging that impression. There is also the impression that everyone will have to be constantly involved in politics, settlement management/defense, in-game a ridiculous amount of time, etc...

As others have pointed out, every player, or play style, will have value in the right group for them. Every player that does anything (even 1 hour/week), will have value to the right and compatible group. There are also options to stay in the Main NPC settlements which (as far as we know) are permanent and require nothing more from you than a certain reputation level and possibly some alignment restriction (though probably broader than a player settlement for a while).

In short, there are many options available. I wish you the best of luck, whether you find the option that fits your play style or you decide to move on. Consider using any play time (kickstarter rewards) to explore the game and see, before you decide it isn't for you. :)

[TEO Urman]

Kryzbyn, I think it will be possible, to an extent. The character won't really be competing with the most serious players in the game, who will leverage faction membership, company ties, and settlement training and connection to be much more powerful.

I think a lot of people have the same concern - they want to be more in control of their game time and destiny and not give that over to some settlement war marshal. You might be surprised; I think many or most settlements probably are willing to give 'solo' players space. Almost everyone has something to offer a settlement.

[CBDunkerson]

Kryzbyn wrote:

Will it be possible to play a character that's wholely unaffiliated?

In an existing MMO, you can 'solo' to an extent and never have to join a guild to progress.
Can the same be said of PFO?

Actually, that can't be said of many existing MMOs. For most of them the best equipment is only available if you are part of a large guild capable of completing raid instances.

From what we know thus far it should be possible to play PFO up to 'tier II' abilities without joining any organization. The top level 'tier 3' abilities will require you to be a member of a settlement and/or a company with a PoI that supports those abilities.

That said, I created the Outsiders company specifically to allow people who don't want to be involved in group play to 'join' a company and/or a settlement founded by it and have no obligations whatsoever. I'm sure others will do the same. Thus, it should be entirely possible to play PFO 'solo' up to the highest levels... you'll just need to be nominally part of an organization to get the most powerful abilities.

[Bringslite of Fidelis]

Kryzbyn wrote:

Will it be possible to play a character that's wholely unaffiliated?

In an existing MMO, you can 'solo' to an extent and never have to join a guild to progress.
Can the same be said of PFO?

Short answer is yes (IMO). I soloed quite a bit in both UO and DFUW. Admittedly, in DFUW, there was a guild and we helped each other quite a bit.

Still, in both those games, even with full corpse loot and the HEAVY PK atmosphere, I soloed the great majority of the time and did just fine. I doubt it will be as easy in PfO in the early months/years but it is possible.

I doubt that you will be able to reach the pinnacle of advanced and exotic character abilities unless you affiliate with a strong player group. There is quite a bit of room to develop and enjoy a character that branches out into a more "broad" or "wide" set of skills.

[Gedichtewicht of Brighthaven]

@Kryzbyn: I wont say no, but trying to do so will severly handicap your development. You will need to go to a player settlement to get hight tier training and equipment.

-So why not join a Player settlement, contribute the influence you earn and get better prices for the stuff you need?

[T7V Jazzlvraz]

cipher_nemo, I hope some of the input you've seen is helpful, and there'll be more, I'm certain; this community talks...a lot. Most of it makes sense, too :-).

[Shane Gifford of Fidelis]

Kryzbyn wrote:

Will it be possible to play a character that's wholely unaffiliated?

In an existing MMO, you can 'solo' to an extent and never have to join a guild to progress.
Can the same be said of PFO?

My counter argument is, why would you play a massively multiplayer game and go out of your way to avoid interacting with the other players?

I would urge you to give other people a chance. They aren't all bad, I promise. :)

[Bringslite of Fidelis]

One thing to add that is contradictory to my other position.

PfO really does seem to be a game being designed around the societal and community aspects of Companies and Settlements. They are designing with the intent (IMO) of making us care deeply about where we hang our hats and who we live with. It is a bit different because of this.

I like it.

[Kryzbyn]

Shane Gifford of Fidelis wrote:

Kryzbyn wrote:

Will it be possible to play a character that's wholely unaffiliated?

In an existing MMO, you can 'solo' to an extent and never have to join a guild to progress.
Can the same be said of PFO?

My counter argument is, why would you play a massively multiplayer game and go out of your way to avoid interacting with the other players?

I would urge you to give other people a chance. They aren't all bad, I promise. :)

Well, the drama from the landrush would be one reason. Reading that thread was painful, and did not instill hope in the community that will be the forerunners for this game's development.

I can't stand guild drama. I've been in all kinds of guilds, both as an officer and as a member, in several different MMOs. I don't pay a monthly fee for added stress, or to participate in someone else's pipe dreams of power. Ain't nobody got time for that.

I certainly don't. This game already feels to me like it's going to be more work than fun, if I participate, I don't want my progress in the hands of other people.

If that's the way it's supposed to be (WAI) then PFO is not the game for me.

[Marlagram]

Actually, not all hope is lost.
When I was actively playing EVE, there was period in my life when I was so tired of my work and winded from too much bickering with my higher ups, I've played just about 1/2-1 hour per evening and sometimes 1/2 hour in the morning. I was out of many areas of activity. But I had my mining (that is - resource gathering). In EVE this is dull and boring activity - unless you do that in lowsec (zone most frquented by small-scale bandits). Bandits from my corporation got most of the clashes with bandit outsiders but some of these pesky types still prowl in the systems where I had mined. Being careful and alert helps - and gives you healthy dose of adrenaline when some ships shows up in your system. So I just mined, and ran from bandits, and moved out from spies, and mined, and mined... Till once one of the PvP leaders of iour coalition said "wow" when I've provided him with all the pyerite (sort of metal) he was in need at that moment. I know well how much more things you can do in EVE, but I had my things to do, I was part of bigger effort and I had my voice in our coalition' discussions. And of course I had my evening bunker of ore! :D
I doubt PFO will be worse. There are signs PFO will be way better than EVE.
Just my 2 cp.

[Kryzbyn]

I should add, I do not regret pledging to these kickstarters.
I love Paizo, and Goblinworks. I want them to succeed, and I'm ok with not being a part of this one thing if it turns out to be something I won't enjoy.
I pledged to support the company, not for a product promised.

[Guurzak]

Kryzbyn wrote:

I don't want my progress in the hands of other people.

When you play in a sandbox, what happens with the sand is up to you and the people around you. If you don't like what they do with it, you need to grab the bucket and shovel yourself. If you want a game experience based primarily on enjoying the content provided by the developers without fear of interference from other players, there are lots of theme park games to choose from.

[Shane Gifford of Fidelis]

Kryzbyn wrote:

I should add, I do not regret pledging to these kickstarters.

I love Paizo, and Goblinworks. I want them to succeed, and I'm ok with not being a part of this one thing if it turns out to be something I won't enjoy.
I pledged to support the company, not for a product promised.

Somebody who understands the premise to kickstarter? Amazing! ;)

[HMT]

I have to agree with Kryzbyn. There are already organization/groups of people who have stated their primary interest is in taking and destroying what others have created. If I always have to be called to defend the city in which I live because some other group of people are always trying to destroy it, how is that fun? This very fact is what has pushed me to join TEO but I am starting to feel like joining a group whose mission is to support positive game-play has just put a target on my back from people who apparently find the most fun in destroying/attacking/dominating. Doesn't make any sense to me. I really hope there is "room to grow" without constant warfare/looking over your shoulder, but I am not yet convinced.

On another note - why did some people feel the need to slightly attack or blame the OP for their post? They were simply posting their opinion and while most people were supportive and understanding a few (one?) was pretty dismissive and prickly. Not cool.

[FMS Quietus]

Kryzbyn wrote:

Shane Gifford of Fidelis wrote:

Kryzbyn wrote:

Will it be possible to play a character that's wholely unaffiliated?

In an existing MMO, you can 'solo' to an extent and never have to join a guild to progress.
Can the same be said of PFO?

My counter argument is, why would you play a massively multiplayer game and go out of your way to avoid interacting with the other players?

I would urge you to give other people a chance. They aren't all bad, I promise. :)

Well, the drama from the landrush would be one reason. Reading that thread was painful, and did not instill hope in the community that will be the forerunners for this game's development.

.

Two large groups having a spat does not equate to the whole community. I agree with you about drama and not having time for it. Ozem's Vigil is the ONLY settlement in the top ten that's independent. We stand firm in our independence and will form alliances on a case by case basis per settlement for now. More groups have stepped forward as well with the same stance. I'm happy to see this because it starts to tear down the Us vs Them mentality that's been prevalent of late.

[Kryzbyn]

Shane Gifford of Fidelis wrote:

Kryzbyn wrote:

I should add, I do not regret pledging to these kickstarters.

I love Paizo, and Goblinworks. I want them to succeed, and I'm ok with not being a part of this one thing if it turns out to be something I won't enjoy.
I pledged to support the company, not for a product promised.

Somebody who understands the premise to kickstarter? Amazing! ;)

Amazing, isn't it? :)

Guurzak wrote:

When you play in a sandbox, what happens with the sand is up to you and the people around you. If you don't like what they do with it, you need to grab the bucket and shovel yourself. If you want a game experience based primarily on enjoying the content provided by the developers without fear of interference from other players, there are lots of theme park games to choose from.

I expected this post or one like it. There's too much here to pick at, so I'll leave it at: I'm sorry you believe there should only ever be two options for the enjoyment of an MMO.

[T7V Jazzlvraz]

Shane Gifford of Fidelis wrote:

...why would you play a massively multiplayer game and go out of your way to avoid interacting with the other players?

My answer to this question, posed on the boards of every MMO ever published, has always been "because this game offers mechanics no single player game's offering, and I want to interact with those mechanics". Of course, it's much easier to feel that way in a theme park tuned to allowing solo play...

[First0f0ne]

I feel the kickstarter should have put forward the idea that PFO will not be a straight port of the PFRPG.

Many of the posts I've read that sound like the OP stem from assumptions that PFO would be an online experience similar to the off line TT experience of the PFRPG. I get that these people are disappointed that this game is not what they thought it was.

However the game as planned is EXACTLY what I have been looking for. A fantasy sandbox with elements of PF/D&D with a freedom and world persistence unseen in the genre. I think that many of the people that were thinking the game was somthing that it is not may easily find a way to play the way they want and enjoy themselves. These people will however have to change their expectations of what the game will be and may well want to wait to start until later on in EE as many there will be little for them to do at first if they are not in a PvP mindset.

[Lifedragn]

I can understand the disappointment cipher_nemo stresses and have often questioned whether I should stick with the game myself. But I have decided to 'go all in' and put my effort into joining a group that will be working to provide the type of environment I wish to play in.

I actually believe there will be a lot of people ultimately disillusioned with the game. The kickstarter drew two distinct audiences. One audience was the Tabletop Pathfinder audience. And the other was an EVE-esque audience who want to play in a fantasy setting. One group seeks to play an MMO almost casually, while the other group is notorious for making the game function like having a second job. This is the pivot of success versus failure that this game rests upon. If the two groups are able to be melded well into a single community then the game stands to have a long and vibrant future. If the two groups fail, then one group will be driven out - probably the Pathfinder-oriented audience, and the game will wind up being labelled as Fantasy EVE by all of the onlookers and will have to compete in that same arena of niche players.

I feel it is in everybody's interest here to work towards making the more casual audience feel welcome and valuable.

[CBDunkerson]

Kryzbyn wrote:

I can't stand guild drama. I've been in all kinds of guilds, both as an officer and as a member, in several different MMOs. I don't pay a monthly fee for added stress, or to participate in someone else's pipe dreams of power. Ain't nobody got time for that.

I certainly don't. This game already feels to me like it's going to be more work than fun, if I participate, I don't want my progress in the hands of other people.

Ummmm.... I did just get done explaining a way to play PFO while avoiding all of those pitfalls, didn't I? Right after TEO Urman gave similar guidance? Can anyone out there hear me? Hello?

[Kryzbyn]

That you address the fact that there will be guilds that cater to a hands off playstyle, there have been many of those, and they still had drama.

So, yes I read it. No, it doesn't change my dislike of guild drama.

[Being]

cipher_nemo wrote:

Of the supporters who donated money to one of the Kickstarter projects, I am among the mostly silent who are extremely disappointed. Silent because I don't participate much in the community, and disappointed because of where Goblinworks is taking Pathfinder Online.

It's becoming a project that focuses on PvP between settlements instead of the sandbox ideas that were originally marketed.

I'm married, I work full time, I have a busy life outside of gaming. I enjoyed the original Goblinworks updates of a sandbox game, but have absolutely no time to play a sandbox MMO competitively within a company/settlement. That's not what I donated for, and that's not what I can or even want to participate in.

As a community you may agree or disagree, but I just wanted to put my voice out there for Paizo/Golbinworks. I'm one of the mostly silent who rarely posts here. How many more mostly silent donators are disappointed?

I, for one, welcome your input cipher_nemo, as it is vital that all points-of-view should be considered. And I believe your position is shared by more folks than you might have imagined.

It is my sincere hope that it will be viable to play the game as a 'casual'. I work full time and have other obligations as well. Even though I've joined with the Seventh Veil I expect that much of what I do will be simply living in the sandbox world of Golarion tryig to make it work for me just as well as it does for those who dedicate themselves to competitive organizational play. To me it is a question of independence versus codependence.

Your voice should be heard and factored. I don't think everything should require a group, even though it will be far more dangerous to go anywhere alone, if there are others of us nearby it shouldn't actually be the case that you are all alone.

One possible solution might be something I proposed some time ago... a loose confederation of independent players who would work to make it possible to play essentially solo even in a group-heavy environment where PvP is going to be the rule. The challenges will be great, but the world will be what we make of it.

[CBDunkerson]

Kryzbyn wrote:

That you address the fact that there will be guilds that cater to a hands off playstyle, there have been many of those, and they still had drama.

So, yes I read it. No, it doesn't change my dislike of guild drama.

I think there is a vast difference between 'hands off' and 'complete freedom to do whatever you like', but ok... you believe that guild drama is unavoidable. Two thirds of PFOs character development can still be accomplished without joining any kind of organization at all. Even with the most focused 'single channel' character that should work out to months of game play.

[Banesama]

First0f0ne wrote:

Many of the posts I've read that sound like the OP stem from assumptions that PFO would be an online experience similar to the off line TT experience of the PFRPG. I get that these people are disappointed that this game is not what they thought it was.

I would love to be able to play an MMO game that is able to truthfully mimic the feel of an off line TT experience. But that is just a pipe dream at the moment. The technology and programming is just nowhere near the level it would need to be to allow this scenario. An MMO game would basically need an true AI to represent a DM.

Technology aside, there is the social aspect. The way the internet allows people to be jerks with anonymity will never allow an MMORPG be similar to a TT experience until that aspect can be remedied.

[Kobold Catgirl]

Honestly, I never got all the talk about false advertising and "suddenly PvP".

Tech Demo Kickstarter wrote:

Pathfinder Online’s robust trading system puts players in control of the world’s economy with player-created items, consumables, fortifications, and settlements. Character-controlled settlements can grow into full-fledged kingdoms that compete for resources as they seek to become the dominant force in the land, raising vast armies to hold their territory against the depredations of monstrous creatures, NPC factions, and other player characters.

From the start, I assumed PvP would be a big deal. And I'm not sad that it's not cloning the Pathfinder ruleset, because DDO already did that (or DDO cloned D&D, which was cloned by Pathfinder). I was glad something new was being done.

[Shane Gifford of Fidelis]

Indeed, and I don't mean offense by this, but I'm not sure how people could have read the same things I read from the Kickstarters and expected "Pathfinder, but in an MMO". Granted, the title of the game is Pathfinder Online, which might suggest that, but if you read what they wrote before you threw money at them I think even from the start you would have had a good idea of where we are right now (at least for the second kickstarter; I will grant that things were still plenty nebulous during the first kickstarter, and part of the risk of backing things several years before they're realized is that not all the concepts are firmed up yet, but I do think PvP was always an important concept, even if they didn't use the word "PvP". It still wasn't at all a bait-and-switch like some posts in the past have suggested).

I personally don't think the game will end up being quite as competitive as some others do. Goblinworks has used the phrase "hybrid sandbox-themepark", talked about creating scripted areas for exploration, and have talked about retaining casual players as well as hardcore players. However, what you have to realize is that the reality of Goblinworks' design approach is that such themepark elements will have to come later. Because they are starting with a very limited budget and aiming for a "minimum viable product", developing as they go, they want to start with something that will keep their dedicated player base and also won't be crazy expensive to develop. The territory game is something that people will become very emotionally invested in (which means they keep paying subs) and also does not require nearly as much development effort comparatively.

Just because they are focusing on that first should not indicate that the competitive, territory-controlling aspect will be the only part of the game, or that every character will have to play that game seriously. They've always talked about keeping room on the outskirts for smaller or more casual groups to create settlements without having to compete with the "big dogs"; I'm sure that if we find all the casual groups being crowded out Goblinworks will respond appropriately, because they want those groups to stay as well.

These are, of course, just musings and speculations from someone who's followed the development for quite a while.

[Caldeathe Baequiannia]

Shane Gifford of Fidelis wrote:

Indeed, and I don't mean offense by this, but I'm not sure how people could have read the same things I read from the Kickstarters and expected "Pathfinder, but in an MMO".

Well, some of us didn't know what to expect. (edit) and, in fact, Pathfinder in an MMO is exactly what I was expecting

All the reading of the announcement in the world didn't tell this never-played-in-an-online-game-before-gamer that players would be fighting each other. Maybe I'm dumb. I'm certainly poorly informed about gaming terminology. As a long-time Pathfinder player, I was perfectly prepared to be set upon by bandits as my crew crosses the terrain, but I was expecting sophisticated AI. It never once occurred to me that those bandits might be people as or more skilled than me and who have been playing online games for a decade or more. My mistake, but don't presume that anyone who got into this knew what they were getting into just because it was sufficiently well described to anyone who's spent a few months in EVE, or Ultima or whatever other choice you have. I still don't understand a third of the acronyms that cross my screen.

I'm willing to pay for my mistake, but I don't appreciate the implication that it wasn't an easy mistake to make.

[Shane Gifford of Fidelis]

That's a fair point. With zero MMO experience I could see terms like "sandbox" and "avoiding meaningless PvP" not meaning much to you. It's more of a failure on my part to acknowledge that not every person has played or looked into MMO's before. I should have phrased my opinion in a less condescending way; apologies on my part.

[Kobold Catgirl]

Caldeathe Baequiannia wrote:

Shane Gifford of Fidelis wrote:

Indeed, and I don't mean offense by this, but I'm not sure how people could have read the same things I read from the Kickstarters and expected "Pathfinder, but in an MMO".

Well, some of us didn't know what to expect. (edit) and, in fact, Pathfinder in an MMO is exactly what I was expecting

All the reading of the announcement in the world didn't tell this never-played-in-an-online-game-before-gamer that players would be fighting each other. Maybe I'm dumb. I'm certainly poorly informed about gaming terminology. As a long-time Pathfinder player, I was perfectly prepared to be set upon by bandits as my crew crosses the terrain, but I was expecting sophisticated AI. It never once occurred to me that those bandits might be people as or more skilled than me and who have been playing online games for a decade or more. My mistake, but don't presume that anyone who got into this knew what they were getting into just because it was sufficiently well described to anyone who's spent a few months in EVE, or Ultima or whatever other choice you have. I still don't understand a third of the acronyms that cross my screen.

I'm willing to pay for my mistake, but I don't appreciate the implication that it wasn't an easy mistake to make.

From what I read (and quoted), "you will fight other players" was made pretty plain from the get-go. I'm assuming I'm misunderstanding you here.

Kickstarter wrote:

Pathfinder Online’s robust trading system puts players in control of the world’s economy with player-created items, consumables, fortifications, and settlements. Character-controlled settlements can grow into full-fledged kingdoms that compete for resources as they seek to become the dominant force in the land, raising vast armies to hold their territory against the depredations of monstrous creatures, NPC factions, and other player characters.

[Guurzak]

Kryzbyn wrote:

I'm sorry you believe there should only ever be two options for the enjoyment of an MMO.

There are an infinite number of options for the enjoyment of an MMO, but some of those options are mutually exclusive. You cannot have "An MMO with platypus racing" which is also "An MMO with no platypus racing."

One of the fundamental design choices of PFO is that a significant portion of the content will be player created and based on inter-player dynamics. "Meaningful human interaction" is a phrase GW throws around a lot. That being the case, saying that "I don't want my progress in the hands of other people" is precisely analogous to saying "I don't want to play the game that GW says they intend to build."

[Kryzbyn]

PVP is least of my concern. It's seemingly having to be tied to someone who has control over my access to training taht I don't like.

The picture painted at the beginning was an accurate one It's the details of how that picture was going to be realized being hashed out, that's where the heartburn comes from. The devil was in the details.

The opening picture could have easily described SWG's first iteration.
SWG had PVP, player owned structures to defend, sandbox environment, other things to do (crafting, piloting, dancing, etc.). It sounded like PFO was going to be the same thing, only fantasy.

No one is at fault for this. It just hasn't turned out that way.

[Kryzbyn]

Guurzak wrote:

Kryzbyn wrote:

I'm sorry you believe there should only ever be two options for the enjoyment of an MMO.

There are an infinite number of options for the enjoyment of an MMO, but some of those options are mutually exclusive. You cannot have "An MMO with platypus racing" which is also "An MMO with no platypus racing."

One of the fundamental design choices of PFO is that a significant portion of the content will be player created and based on inter-player dynamics. "Meaningful human interaction" is a phrase GW throws around a lot. That being the case, saying that "I don't want my progress in the hands of other people" is precisely analogous to saying "I don't want to play the game that GW says they intend to build."

I guess we've come full circle then?

Me wrote:

I certainly don't. This game already feels to me like it's going to be more work than fun, if I participate, I don't want my progress in the hands of other people.

If that's the way it's supposed to be (WAI) then PFO is not the game for me.

Which I then followed up with:

Me wrote:

I should add, I do not regret pledging to these kickstarters.

I love Paizo, and Goblinworks. I want them to succeed, and I'm ok with not being a part of this one thing if it turns out to be something I won't enjoy.
I pledged to support the company, not for a product promised.

So...I'm aware my option is not to play this specific game.

The tone of your first post as "well if you don't like sandboxes, go play a themepark." A valid option, but there are varying degrees of both. I could play in a sandbox where my guild leader isn't in control of my access to training, if it existed.
It's not all or nothing, but in this one specific instance with PFO it is.

[Nihimon]

cipher_nemo wrote:

Of the supporters who donated money to one of the Kickstarter projects, I am among the mostly silent who are extremely disappointed. Silent because I don't participate much in the community, and disappointed because of where Goblinworks is taking Pathfinder Online.

It's becoming a project that focuses on PvP between settlements instead of the sandbox ideas that were originally marketed.

I think it's the players who are focusing so much on the PvP. Goblinworks has been up-front about PvP being included since To Live and Die in the River Kingdoms in January of 2012.

Quote:

One thing that we're deeply committed to at Goblinworks is building a game that has a low tolerance for "griefing."