Pathfinder Online vs. Life is Feudal


Pathfinder Online

201 to 250 of 378 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.
<Kabal> Daeglin wrote:
Bluddwolf wrote:
<Kabal> Daeglin wrote:
No. It is their loss though I know you don't understand that. Considering you don't know me from a brick in the wall, calling me a fanboi cause I don't share your opinion kinda says more about you then me ;)

"Shrug" your loss. You see how that works, or doesn't work?

Shrugging off legitimate concerns is arrogance. It is GW loss because PFO is not giving a potential consumer of their product anything that the consumer can not get elsewhere.

Arrogance is assuming your opinion is superior to others. My comment had nothing to do with the legitimate concerns voiced in this thread. You just assumed that. I actually find some merit in a lot of Andius's points, if not how he is expressing them. Overly restricted PvP is a particular concern of mine, but really isn't the issue. I simply believe that people who don't try PFO are ultimately missing out. So yeah, *shrug*. But I won't threadjack anymore.

I tried PFO for about 2 weeks solid. My whole guild tried it for a week. It's a half-baked game with simplistic targeting and crafting. The chasm between that and a game about civilization building is so wide that the other side isn't even visible. I plan to try it again a week before EE starts (while I can still do so for free), but at this state, I feel that it's no where near providing the systems that will create a "draw". I think that any further expectations are wishful thinking. At the current rate of development and current state of incomplete-ness, I don't expect working settlements until next spring. I hope I'm wrong, but right now it's an incomplete game where the content that's implemented is only half-working.

So, I agree with Andius on his LiF standpoint. They released something that works smoothly and well, but doesn't have all of it's features yet, which is what I was expecting from PFO. That's not what I feel we have here.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The Unity engine is quite powerful and it's POSSIBLE for Goblin Works to end up doing a lot with it if PFO can manage to pull of a small EE launch and keep going with development.

http://gloriavictisgame.com/

This is an MMORPG game that's been in development by a small group that I think are doing this in their "off-time" while working other jobs. They're using the Unity Engine and while the game hasn't yet implemented its conquest system and community mechanics, it does have a very simplistic manual-aimed combat system, working crafting system, detailed terrain and lighting, and even guild and group mechanics (that are still a bit buggy at the moment). The game is still in pre-Alpha, so it has a long way to go, but it's a great example to see what's with the Unity Engine and where PFO could get to one day.

screenshots

Goblin Squad Member

Bluddwolf wrote:
As I have said Minimal Viable Product is not "what can GW produce" it is "what are consumers willing to spend their money on".

Then, Bluddwolf, you have so said wrongly. MVP is the minimum viable product for the currently planned iteration at the EE milestone, not at the Open Enrollment milestone. Your representation is of the release candidate rather than the end of alpha candidate.

Undisciplined thinking creeps in on all of us.

Goblin Squad Member

That looks quit nice! Alas, no magic in Gloria Victis either. :(

Goblin Squad Member

Doc || Allegiant Gemcutters wrote:
... It's probably a mistake to contribute any amount of money to a kickstarter that you aren't willing to just shrug your shoulders at and walk away.

Indeed, it is an error to mistake a contribution for an investment you can expect any return on whatsoever. Feathers are not stones. A contribution is to a cause, not a transaction for gain.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Leithlen wrote:
They released something that works smoothly and well, but doesn't have all of it's features yet, which is what I was expecting from PFO. That's not what I feel we have here.

This to me is valid. If someone is going to critique GW, it should be exactly this. Suddenly turning on the business plan after GW told you what it was a million times over seems insincere, like a guy who ordered anchovy pizza only to want their money back because they hate anchovies. Criticizing GW's dedication to crowdforging is just plain BS and offensive to be honest.

But if you are saying that EE was supposed to be SIMPLE but FUNCTIONAL and you do not think it is functioning in a manner that warrants Minimum Viable Product, that is a valid argument. You are probably pointing directly at the combat and I can understand someone saying they will be back in a few months but are disappointed.

There was an update to the combat last week but I am still sliding after every single battle, my two weapon fighting is bugged out the wazzoo and the animation delays and lack of combat logs make analysis an exercise in faith.

Yes, I do believe this needs to be better before EE starts.

Goblin Squad Member

Clunky Combat is why I stopped playing for now. I was hoping after the last patch that we would see less animation locks and redundant animations, but it is still a pita to go from Bow to Sword, or from using a Utility or a Consumable to a Bow or Sword attack.

Currently there is no connection, no *feel* at all to what you are pressing on your keyboard, what your avatar is doing on the screen and the Hitpointsbar of your opponent.

There is also a weird count-down bar *after* you use an Implement (spell) that completely blocks you from making any other attacks: this feels very counter-intuitive.

CC, Buff and Debuffs are so short that I do not bother with them and rather use the Stamina and time to apply DPS. So I only use the 2 basic attacks. Mixing it up with Spells, Utilities or Consumables (half of which do not seem to be working or at least give no visual feedback of working) is a waste of time because of the animation-jumble and is likely to get me killed.

So it's Basic Longbowstrike, wait for Opportunity, Basic Longbow Exploit, or jump in the middle of a bunch of mobs and use Sword + Whirlwind x2. And a lot of running away, off course.

This is solo. I am curious if groups are using Slows and Stuns and other CC when they hit harder content: I have a feeling they don't.

Goblin Squad Member

Tyncale wrote:
There is also a weird count-down bar *after* you use an Implement (spell) that completely blocks you from making any other attacks: this feels very counter-intuitive.

This is a known bug and will be fixed.

Scarab Sages Goblin Squad Member

Bluddwolf wrote:
Being wrote:
Andius the Afflicted wrote:
At this point we have nothing more than a contentless theme-park
No, we have the beginnings of a sandbox builder game with minimal PVE elements and the potential for PvP.

Being, perhaps you don't realize it but this statement sounds to me like you're saying PFO basically delivers almost nothing.

In comparison, Life is Feudal is delivering far more and likely by a similarly sized company and with a similar budget.

I unfortunately am at work and I can not research the specifics. However, what I hope the Devs (particularly Ryan) does is to look at this game, and many others, because they are all PFO's competition.

As I have said Minimal Viable Product is not "what can GW produce" it is "what are consumers willing to spend their money on".

To some extent, this seems like two different stages of "viability".

In one view, PFO will be viable when there's enough of a core game to give people something to play while the rest of the game grows from the core.

In the other view, it will be viable when it's capable of paying for its own future growth in an increasingly competitive marketplace.

Personally, I believe that PFO will reach functional viability first, then over the course of EE it will continue developing until it reaches commercial viability. They're just two different things.

A fetus reaches the point where it's viable in a 21st Century NICU long before it would be viable in a 19th Century hospital, or in a 12th Century midwife's cottage. Again, different definitions of "viable".

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
KarlBob wrote:
...until it reaches commercial viability.

Remember also that we don't know how many folks have to decide to play--and thus pay--for Goblinworks to continue development through self-funding; Ryan's told us that's a goal of EE.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

T7V Avari wrote:
Leithlen wrote:
They released something that works smoothly and well, but doesn't have all of it's features yet, which is what I was expecting from PFO. That's not what I feel we have here.
This to me is valid. If someone is going to critique GW, it should be exactly this.

He's talking about LiF.

"That's not what I feel we have here" <= Here, as in PFO.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
T7V Jazzlvraz wrote:
KarlBob wrote:
...until it reaches commercial viability.
Remember also that we don't know how many folks have to decide to play--and thus pay--for Goblinworks to continue development through self-funding; Ryan's told us that's a goal of EE.

GW don't need backers funds to pay for game development. They're just a nice to have. We were told that by GW during the Kickstarter campaign. A quote from the Kickstarter campaign site:

"Because Goblinworks has the funding to make Pathfinder Online, even if the timeline is a long one, there is only a very small chance that the game will never see release."


1 person marked this as a favorite.
T7V Avari wrote:

But if you are saying that EE was supposed to be SIMPLE but FUNCTIONAL and you do not think it is functioning in a manner that warrants Minimum Viable Product, that is a valid argument. You are probably pointing directly at the combat and I can understand someone saying they will be back in a few months but are disappointed.

Yes, I do believe this needs to be better before EE starts.

It's more than just bland and unresponsive combat (although that of course is probably enough of a problem on its own). As of 2 weeks ago PFO felt like a bland game with dated graphics and no content. I don't consider gathering, crafting, and unresponsive combat to be a "minimum viable sandbox", nor even a platform upon which you can build a functional sandbox with a framework for civilization-building. Yes, the AH has been added, but the reputation system, encumbrance, fatigue when sprinting, legal framework, settlement management, and heck, even company creation and management are ALL MISSING and/or not implemented.

As of right now, about 10%-20% of the game is present and most of that barely works. I don't feel this is "minimum viable". In order to believe that this game was on a path to success it needed to have the following by launch to show potential players what the game would be capable of:
A pre-built settlement that had limited-feature management systems (to show players what they're getting into)
working companies (what game launches without the ability to create a guild???)
crafting
gathering
bland but functional combat
a working, but plain-Jane basic interface including grouping and trade
encumbrance
stamina drain
threading
inventory loss when dying
player looting
ability for "bandits" to exist to create some semblance of threat

That would have been about "minimum". GV has a substantially smaller team with a lesser budget and they have all but the settlement part (they're full loot with no threading or inventory loss) of that above list while still in "pre-Alpha". PFO still has the best concepts I've seen for a game design, but what's currently in the game reminds me of a lot of other games that I've followed closely that promised the moon and failed to ever leave the ground.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well...

-We have Pre-Built Settlements, although no Management Systems.
-Gathering, Refining, Crafting are all in the game (Personally I feel that the Refining and Crafting bits are solid)
-Combat is in, but not quite to bland functional yet.
-UI is OK at best, needs to be updated
-Pseudo-Threading is in right now, but player looting isn't turned on so you don't know that when you die, all your gear stays with you.

What we need is:

-A better combat system, that has less bugs, more versatility, and buffs/debuffs/effects that seem meaningful.
- Companies, at least basic function.
- Management options for Settlements.
- Encumbrance
- Stamina Drain, Arcane Spell Failure, and a working Armor System.
- Player Looting, Inventory Loss

I do know they are trying to get Companies, Player Looting, and Inventory Loss in before EE. I would suggest that they push it back another month, have 3 more major patches to fix stuff.

Sovereign Court Goblin Squad Member

Stamina drain from sprinting was in a previous alpha, but was temporarily removed with the change in max stamina. So the tech certainly exists. There is also stamina drain in the form of the exhaustion debuff.

Arcane Spell Failure doesn't really fit with the overall combat design of no misses (0 dmg). When the crafting interface was first introduced we were shown an example (T3 heavy armor?) which had a significant penalty to arcane attacks. That penalty greatly reduces the effect of arcane spells in heavy armor while still being consistent with the overall combat design. Not sure how many items have such a penalty implemented yet though; it might just be the really high end armors.

Goblin Squad Member

I was under the impression that you could miss (0 damage), if it was low enough.

Also, I remember some of the earlier tech, a lot of people just switched armor to travel.

Sovereign Court Goblin Squad Member

TEO Cheatle wrote:

I was under the impression that you could miss (0 damage), if it was low enough.

Also, I remember some of the earlier tech, a lot of people just switched armor to travel.

Sure, in extreme cases 0 damage is possible (low base damage vs very high resistance or low attack versus very high defenses and a very low roll), but those cases are only possible in extremely lopsided matchups.

I meant 0 damage as a common occurence. Apologies for any confusion.

Goblin Squad Member

Leithlen wrote:


It's more than just bland and unresponsive combat (although that of course is probably enough of a problem on its own). As of 2 weeks ago PFO felt like a bland game with dated graphics and no content. I don't consider gathering, crafting, and unresponsive combat to be a "minimum viable sandbox", nor even a platform upon which you can build a functional sandbox with a framework for civilization-building. Yes, the AH has been added, but the reputation system, encumbrance, fatigue when sprinting, legal framework, settlement management, and heck, even company creation and management are ALL MISSING and/or not implemented.

As of right now, about 10%-20% of the game is present and most of that barely works. I don't feel this is "minimum viable". In order to believe that this game was on a path to success it needed to have the following by launch to show potential players what the game would be capable of:
A pre-built settlement that had limited-feature management systems (to show players what they're getting into)
working companies (what game launches without the ability to create a guild???)
crafting
gathering
bland but functional combat
a working, but plain-Jane basic interface including grouping and trade
encumbrance
stamina drain
threading
inventory loss when dying
player looting
ability for "bandits" to exist to create some semblance of threat

That would have been about "minimum". GV has a substantially smaller team with a lesser budget and they have all but the settlement part (they're full loot with no threading or inventory loss) of that above list while still in...

This is actually a pretty responsible list of things to want for EE.

- I believe the proto settlements are a good enough start for EE, I understand someone wanting to wait for more, but I'm not in that camp.

- Agree with the companies 100%, not sure where the devs are at with that.

- Gathering/crafting really don't what else people want out of that. That part is definitely EE functional.

- Grouping/Trade is in.

- encumbrance/stamina drain I understand will be back in very soon.

- Threading/player looting since we are jump starting the economy from nothing and anything worth anything will be player made, I find it perfectly reasonable that by design, you would give the player base a couple weeks/month to "build the sand castles" before enabling "knocking over sand castles".

10-20% I really can't agree with. I think they are almost there.

Goblin Squad Member

I see the game has 50%-60% ready for EE.

If they waited till the end of November to start EE, then that would be different.

3 Solid Patches, to fix everything currently bugged, improve the hell out of Combat, fix escalations, add companies, looting, pvp, encumbrance, node gushers, enchanting, armor fully functional, and ammo/consumables working.

I am pretty sure we will see looting, pvp, some combat fixes in the next patch. I think they are going to implement WoT for testing sooner rather than later.


I agree that companies should be considered part of MVP.

Encumbrance and player looting should be in before EE, nothing major needs to be done to gathering/crafting, that's already at an MVP level.

Being able to manage settlements wouldn't make sense, because several other mechanics are necessary before that serves a functional purpose, so not really MVP.

Other than that I'm not sure that you feel EE launch will be missing in terms of a MVP. If you just want to wait for an overall more complete game before EE, however, that's a different, and possibly valid, issue. I personally think the game will be ready to launch EE if we get companies/encumbrance/looting and the server instability has been fixed.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Would be kinda nice if we could party up and not have to constantly worry about making our characters useless for weeks as well.

I have spent a fair amount of time in Alpha so far (Dwarf Dwarf Dwarf), but I struggle to accept that what we have right now is worth $15 a month. The combat still needs a fair bit of work, the reputation system is still inherently broken (in that it is punishing the wrong thing), there are still fairly severe stability issues.

Crafting is good though. Actually, I think crafting is the only thing that I would green light for my own MVP, mostly because I think Gushers should be MVP for gathering.

Personally, I don't see them getting there in two weeks. Progress has been fairly good so far, at least from my perspective, but I worry that we are in for another delay. I honestly think that it might be for the best.

Goblin Squad Member

T7V Avari wrote:
Leithlen wrote:
They released something that works smoothly and well, but doesn't have all of it's features yet, which is what I was expecting from PFO. That's not what I feel we have here.

This to me is valid. If someone is going to critique GW, it should be exactly this. Suddenly turning on the business plan after GW told you what it was a million times over seems insincere, like a guy who ordered anchovy pizza only to want their money back because they hate anchovies. Criticizing GW's dedication to crowdforging is just plain BS and offensive to be honest.

But if you are saying that EE was supposed to be SIMPLE but FUNCTIONAL and you do not think it is functioning in a manner that warrants Minimum Viable Product, that is a valid argument. You are probably pointing directly at the combat and I can understand someone saying they will be back in a few months but are disappointed.

There was an update to the combat last week but I am still sliding after every single battle, my two weapon fighting is bugged out the wazzoo and the animation delays and lack of combat logs make analysis an exercise in faith.

Yes, I do believe this needs to be better before EE starts.

The minimum viable product is absolutely open to criticism.

Nether of the PFO kickstarter prospectuses (prospecti?) mentioned the term mvp. It was those kickstarter websites customers read when they were sold the game, and upgrades to pay for EE or Beta as it was also called at the time. Many backers may well feel that they are being given less than they had signed up for.

From the kickstarter websites PFO has:

a hybrid sandbox/theme park mmo
a world of high fantasy in the tradition of epics like the lord of the rings, ....
a robust trading system
character controlled settlements
exciting scripted adventures

Personally some areas I think GW need to concentrate on before EE launch are:

- settlement management
- graphics, with a focus on eliminating as far as possible the quirks that make the game look amateur, like clipping walls, having buildings suddenly appear 20 paces ahead of you, being able to see beyond buildings through the space between the floor and the ground, etc. PFO is going to get massacred if it launches with too many of these
- the auction house. I played eve, much of the time with a focus on industry and the market. PFO aspires to have a dynamic economy much like eve. For that to happen people need to be able to access lots of market info effectively. Eve is spread sheets in space, but it works for the trading game. The current incarnation of the auction house doesn't do that. I can't see what is available. I can't place buy orders. It isn't even fun to go shopping for new gear.
- kickstarter add ons. We paid for them.

Goblin Squad Member

Kelpie wrote:
Nether of the PFO kickstarter prospectuses (prospecti?) mentioned the term mvp.

No, but two days after the second Kickstarter went live, Goblinworks posted the "What To Expect From Early Access Beta" blog, which did a good job of establishing a helpful mind-set to track GW's progress. It was also Update #2, with about 85-90% of funding yet to arrive, so people considering donating to the Kickstarter were able to consider it in making their decisions.

Goblin Squad Member

T7V Jazzlvraz wrote:
Kelpie wrote:
Nether of the PFO kickstarter prospectuses (prospecti?) mentioned the term mvp.
No, but two days after the second Kickstarter went live, Goblinworks posted the "What To Expect From Early Access Beta" blog, which did a good job of establishing a helpful mind-set to track GW's progress. It was also Update #2, with about 85-90% of funding yet to arrive, so people considering donating to the Kickstarter were able to consider it in making their decisions.

What is the Minimum Population, post initial Kickstarter free time, needed for continued viability or future development of the product?


TEO Cheatle wrote:

Well...

-We have Pre-Built Settlements, although no Management Systems.
-Gathering, Refining, Crafting are all in the game (Personally I feel that the Refining and Crafting bits are solid)
-Combat is in, but not quite to bland functional yet.
-UI is OK at best, needs to be updated
-Pseudo-Threading is in right now, but player looting isn't turned on so you don't know that when you die, all your gear stays with you.

What we need is:

-A better combat system, that has less bugs, more versatility, and buffs/debuffs/effects that seem meaningful.
- Companies, at least basic function.
- Management options for Settlements.
- Encumbrance
- Stamina Drain, Arcane Spell Failure, and a working Armor System.
- Player Looting, Inventory Loss

I do know they are trying to get Companies, Player Looting, and Inventory Loss in before EE. I would suggest that they push it back another month, have 3 more major patches to fix stuff.

Agree with you Cheatle, and if they make that decision, I might have some confidence in GW again. If they'd made that decision in August, I'd be singing their praises.

Goblin Squad Member

Leithlen wrote:
TEO Cheatle wrote:

Well...

-We have Pre-Built Settlements, although no Management Systems.
-Gathering, Refining, Crafting are all in the game (Personally I feel that the Refining and Crafting bits are solid)
-Combat is in, but not quite to bland functional yet.
-UI is OK at best, needs to be updated
-Pseudo-Threading is in right now, but player looting isn't turned on so you don't know that when you die, all your gear stays with you.

What we need is:

-A better combat system, that has less bugs, more versatility, and buffs/debuffs/effects that seem meaningful.
- Companies, at least basic function.
- Management options for Settlements.
- Encumbrance
- Stamina Drain, Arcane Spell Failure, and a working Armor System.
- Player Looting, Inventory Loss

I do know they are trying to get Companies, Player Looting, and Inventory Loss in before EE. I would suggest that they push it back another month, have 3 more major patches to fix stuff.

Agree with you Cheatle, and if they make that decision, I might have some confidence in GW again. If they'd made that decision in August, I'd be singing their praises.

I agree, another month would do a lot of good.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think the auction houses, leveling, escalations, proto settlements, crafting and gathering are all MVP right now. I fully expect constant improvements in all of them, but they are functional as they stand.

Encumbrance and threading are all PvP issues and as i just said, I beleieve in giving the sand castle builders a small head start on the sand castle destroyers.

Give me Companies and combat animations and I'm ready to roll with my pre paid 2 years ago credits. Nobody is actually paying $15/month for another 2-3 months, so while I agree that this list of things needs to be in by that time, I believe we do have enough to get an economy rolling.

Goblin Squad Member

From Jazz's "what to expect in early enrollment" link, above, "Monsters, fighting, questing, even crafting and PvP around basic player-owned structures will be available when we begin Early Access"

I'm not sure that "Acheivements" counts as questing, but perhaps the escalations are close enough.

I think that the Towers as "Player owned structures" is probably a stretch. They're a bit behind the ball on the PvP, I'd say, which is of minor* issue to me, but is a legitimate complaint of anyone who's interested in it.

* I think we could use a post about "PvP and me" (that being the generic "me," rather than "I") to help some of us understand each other. My thoughts on PvP are not necessarily what a lot of people think they are, and I'm prepared to be flexible on what I find fun. If someone doesn't start such a thread before me, look for one later.

Scarab Sages Goblin Squad Member

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm ready to start playing with a persistent character today. It's hard to stay motivated for weeks on end with a character that's going to vanish soon.

I'm pretty confident that by the time I need to spend any more money, the game will be an MVP that I'm willing to pay for.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
KarlBob wrote:

I'm ready to start playing with a persistent character today. It's hard to stay motivated for weeks on end with a character that's going to vanish soon.

I'm pretty confident that by the time I need to spend any more money, the game will be an MVP that I'm willing to pay for.

I am pretty much ready too. I would like to experience some persistence. It is most likely that another month or two will not make enough difference for the crowd out there to change their opinions. Most of what I need is in.

Haters gonna hate.

Players really love you when thier playing.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bringslite of Fidelis wrote:

...

Haters gonna hate.

Players really love you when thier playing.

Uh oh. Now you done it. I'm gonna have to break into song and my 13 year old Taylor Swift fan with the friends over will die of embarrassment...

Scarab Sages Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
<Kabal> Daeglin wrote:
Bringslite of Fidelis wrote:

...

Haters gonna hate.

Players really love you when thier playing.

Uh oh. Now you done it. I'm gonna have to break into song and my 13 year old Taylor Swift fan with the friends over will die of embarrassment...

Doooo Eeeeet! Embarrassing your teenager is your responsibility as a parent.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm going to agree that another month delay would be beneficial to the game. The patches do seem to have a real impact on the game and I feel like they can get a lot sorted in a month.

My biggest gripe is honestly with the combat systems. Animation, ability timing, etc have all been a big turn off for people I drag into the alpha. Everything you do in the game just seems to have a delay. Some sort of signifier that an ability is "queue'd" might help.

Not being able to read tooltips that flow off the screen is incredibly frustrating for people trying to learn how abilities pair together.

Another +1 on company management functionality being important.

I'd rather keep waiting for a solid MVP then have players driven away from the game before it has a chance to really get going.

Also, just a small graphics suggestion... Turn down the gloss! Everything in the game is just too shiny. Some trees and rocks look like they're made out of balloons depending on the angle you're seeing them from.


Being wrote:
celestialiar wrote:
I didn't think we'd be finding nodes or... farming recipes for crafting. I kind of thought that would be a temporary measure until the environment was made more alive. alas.

So rather than sitting back passively, like a spectator, take an active role. Make suggestions toward your vision in the Ideascale crowdforging tool, Celest. What was you vision? However nebulous and unformed it might have been it was inspiring enough for you to make a meaningful commitment. If you manage to capture us with your vision we could well find our GW devs grow caught up in a brilliant idea and eventually it may become a milestone realized in our shared history.

But if you don't, if you allow it to lapse and fade, engulfed and fed upon in a parasitic mass of writhing disappointments and painful cynicisms we may never see its like again.

I am passive now because I see.

As I said in the beginning (my post history, check it!), the forging stage of an MMO will grab people who hope. It is like an election, you reach a wide audience. I now see the way things are shaping up. I also feel GW doesn't want to really make the game as advanced as I thought they would. The idea of a TT based Sandbox says DEPTH to me. We're almost to EE and what is going on?

EE is gonna be more of an alpha level product to me. I wonder if in 1 year they can get it together (that's that serious.)

Please do not question my effort or devotion to *anything.* I am not the developer of PFO. This is not my fault. My words are only words.

I believe unless what I suggested was something they could easily program in, they wouldn't do it. Like I said this is shaping up to be a game that has nothing but players. And they think the players will keep it going. I personally don't. You have to motivate them in some way. Especially considering there are other sandbox MMOs. If this was the only game with TC, then sure it would be a selling point.

Like I said, required reading for your reply is... my post history. I haven't even made that many posts. read all of them then we can talk about my vision.

Goblin Squad Member

Is Goblinworks willing to get to a better stage in another month, then not charge for the next month when into EE? Then start charging 1 month or 2 in?

That way: 1 month to get the game into playable state. Another month to get players playing and advancing but not paying. Then with those 2 months, should be about right to start charging if things go well?

Theoretical suggestion because I can't make a judgement without seeing the game or playing it.

I did think the email invite timeline looked promising however for providing some interesting gameplay when settlements start claiming and clashing over land.

Goblin Squad Member

celestialiar wrote:
Please do not question my effort or devotion to *anything.* I am not the developer of PFO. This is not my fault. My words are only words.

I wasn't pointing toward fault, but toward responsibility.

celestialiar wrote:
I believe unless what I suggested was something they could easily program in, they wouldn't do it.

Difficulty will increase cost, but cost can be outweighed by value. That is a central tenet to project management, and the developer is unlikely to dismiss the difficult where there is sufficient promise of value.

celestialiar wrote:

Like I said this is shaping up to be a game that has nothing but players. And they think the players will keep it going. I personally don't. You have to motivate them in some way. Especially considering there are other sandbox MMOs. If this was the only game with TC, then sure it would be a selling point.

Like I said, required reading for your reply is... my...

I daren't make the same requirement of you before you can say something to me. The number of my posts is too great, and the majority of them say something. I confess I tend to attempt humor in too many of the rest.

But if you don't adequately value what you have to contribute ("words are only words"), then should I?

Words are not merely words: words carry meanings. Meanings suggest value. But then I am one of those odd people who believe that opinions are not all alike or of equal value. For me opinion is a human representation of practical truth, a.k.a. 'the Case', and that facts are characteristics of truth. The more an opinion is built from facts, the more like truth that opinion is bound to be.

Goblin Squad Member

AvenaOats wrote:

Is Goblinworks willing to get to a better stage in another month, then not charge for the next month when into EE? Then start charging 1 month or 2 in?

That way: 1 month to get the game into playable state. Another month to get players playing and advancing but not paying. Then with those 2 months, should be about right to start charging if things go well?

Theoretical suggestion because I can't make a judgement without seeing the game or playing it.

I did think the email invite timeline looked promising however for providing some interesting gameplay when settlements start claiming and clashing over land.

Avena I tried, but your forum settings denying contact prevented sending an alpha invitation to you. Sadly I am currently out of invitations, but I feel confident that someone has one they would give you were there a way to do so.

Goblin Squad Member

T7V Jazzlvraz wrote:
Andius the Afflicted wrote:
I feel like it's fairly hard to argue that at this point LiF has the better product.

This sentence seems to read exactly the opposite of what I believe your message is; you appear to be saying that LIF *does* have the better product, thus you must not believe it's hard to argue.

Some questions:
- How is the communication between LIF's developers and their customers?
- Are the customers participating in development?
- Can a 64-character server develop a sustainable economy?

I can answer these questions for you.

1. I was having difficulty in getting the game to see my local server. A developer, Vladimir Piskunov, walked me through the process over 3 emails and even informed me of a patch that was prompted by my and other's issue.

2. I would rather have the Developers respond to our issues and fix them, than our ideas and give them lip service. I'm not saying that the LiF Devs don't take suggestions, I believe they spend more time fixing bugs and adding content.

3. Yes, absolutely. I have now lived in two settlement that were completely self sufficient through a division of labor model and a communal spirit of everyone chipping in to complete common area / use projects.

I will add, the sense of wonder and danger are very real in LiF. Wonder is mostly due to the amount of layers the Devs have put into the harvesting, crafting and even the natural environment. For example: Plants and Trees grow better based in the quality of the soil yiu plant them in. They are also affected by the amount of sun light, rain and what yiu do in and around them.

The danger, especially in getting wounded is incredible. I was attacked by a wolf. I was knocked unconscious, partially eaten and left for dead. I recovered enough to wake up and stagger away. I had lacerations, and broken ribs. It took me four hours to recover from the injuries and a full week to get back to maximum hit points and stamina.

This us not a project backed by a big label developer, not a lage team, and has only been in alpha since May (I believe).

I certainly hope someone at GW is at least following this game or better yet, actually playing it. There is a lot that they can see that makes a game innovative.

Goblin Squad Member

Sounds like a fantastic game I must say! But also like it requires a lot of dedication.

Goblin Squad Member

It sounds interesting, but I must say that the one-world concept of PFO is still a huge deal to me.

I want Eve-levels of political and economical stuff going on in PFO. I want to get a good feeling when I read in the River Kingdoms Herald, that there is HUGE war going on in the South, while I am cosy and safe somewhere in the North. And then I want to become worried when things start to spill over to the North and my settlement may have to prepare for harsher times. Or I want to calculate my chances of earning good coin from such a war.

All this may never come to fruition, I realize this.

There is also the hope that for a Crafter/Trader like me, I can take *calculated* risks in PFO, and try to minimize them till a level that is still fun.

I am not sure if the level of PvP is still a little ( or a lot) on the hard side with the games you mention.

They sure sound intriguing though. Will check them out.

Goblin Squad Member

I second Tyncale in all he says, although my peddler/drifter/scavenger concept perhaps view wars in a little different way ... especially when husks comes around ...

Goblin Squad Member

Schedim wrote:
Sounds like a fantastic game I must say! But also like it requires a lot of dedication.

Dedication.... You mean like, having to grind hundreds of mobs with several different weapons, to advance your character?

Like, having to get a group (8-10) to grind an escalation for four hours to reduce it to 70%. Then return next night and find it is back to where you started.

Having to train in roles or skills you don't want, just to advance you in the role you do.

No, LiF doesn't require dedication like that.

The areas where LiF excels over PFO, that GW could implement are:

1. A true sandbox. Roles should be balanced and pure.
2. Breathe some life into the world. I can't describe or list all the things that go into this, all I can say is that you clearly feel it when it is missing.

Goblin Squad Member

No, I mean on a personal level, if you are as few as 64, a person missing for a week can have great impact. In PFO you I can be missing out and there may always be a lot of other to fill in.

And about the atmo, yeah, I understand that...

Goblin Squad Member

Schedim wrote:

No, I mean on a personal level, if you are as few as 64, a person missing for a week can have great impact. In PFO you I can be missing out and there may always be a lot of other to fill in.

And about the atmo, yeah, I understand that...

That is just for now, there will be an MMO version of LiF with 10,000+ per server.

As for the "if one is missing for a week", unless it is the sole GM, it has little impact. If your group is organized you can fill in for someone that is missing.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

A single server is overrated. The larger a server gets the less you know the community. One of my major gripes about EVE politics is it felt completely non-personal. I didn't even know the leader of my alliance, much less anyone from the opposing factions.

10,000 people is really as big of a community as I would find desireable to play in. It's also a number of players PFO is not likely to ever have online at once.

In smaller servers there is still histories and large wars. You're just much more likely to personally know the people who play the major parts in them.

Goblin Squad Member

Andius the Afflicted wrote:

A single server is overrated. The larger a server gets the less you know the community. One of my major gripes about EVE politics is it felt completely non-personal. I didn't even know the leader of my alliance, much less anyone from the opposing factions.

10,000 people is really as big of a community as I would find desireable to play in. It's also a number of players PFO is not likely to ever have online at once.

In smaller servers there is still histories and large wars. You're just much more likely to personally know the people who play the major parts in them.

Well to be honest, if you were a null sec corp, a wormhole corp or a high sec corp, it was very easy to get lost in the vastness. Low Sec "Pipeline" corps were often well known in their local regions.

Goblin Squad Member

It seems that the first lines of codes of LIF were written in oktober 2010, though I guess they really started off in November 2011. That is still quit a bit earlier then PFO who started coding in 2013, I think. Or am I wrong? Since GW decided in Januari 2013 that they would use Unity as middleware, I can not believe they would have had much code before that.

Though I am sure there was art and quit a bit of work on the designdoc already.

Not trying to defend PFO, I feel that they should be further along myself by now, but it may not be entirely fair to compare these 2 games when it comes to the state that they are in.

Goblin Squad Member

Right but you had little meaning as a group in the grand scheme of things. From my personal experience.

Freelancer, most influential player on the server. On a first name basis with every member of my group and knew anyone of note on the entire server.

Darkfall. Spoke with my alliance leader within days of joining one of the larger alliances on the server as a newb. Later formed my own alliance, spoke with many alliance heads, and knew the majority of members in my group pretty well / quite a few of the regulars in the alliance.

EVE didn't know much of anyone outside the people who frequented the system I hung out in the most. Couldn't even name my alliance leader at this point or most the groups in the alliance.

That is partially because I never really dove into EVE politics but partially because there were too damn many people to really get to know.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Schedim wrote:

No, I mean on a personal level, if you are as few as 64, a person missing for a week can have great impact. In PFO you I can be missing out and there may always be a lot of other to fill in.

And about the atmo, yeah, I understand that...

64 connections, not 64 players.

I remember the golden age of NWN. A 64 slots server was CROWDED, by people you never had the chance to actually know.

And just like NWN, I'm pretty sure LiF will offer the possibility to link a few servers.

I completely agree with Andius, mono-servers are overrated.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Tyncale wrote:

It seems that the first lines of codes of LIF were written in oktober 2010, though I guess they really started off in November 2011. That is still quit a bit earlier then PFO who started coding in 2013, I think. Or am I wrong? Since GW decided in Januari 2013 that they would use Unity as middleware, I can not believe they would have had much code before that.

Though I am sure there was art and quit a bit of work on the designdoc already.

Not trying to defend PFO, I feel that they should be further along myself by now, but it may not be entirely fair to compare these 2 games when it comes to the state that they are in.

The first KS began may 2012, and they had already begun.

201 to 250 of 378 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Licensed Products / Digital Games / Pathfinder Online / Pathfinder Online vs. Life is Feudal All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.