| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hey everyone,
So, I really want to get Pathfinder Online. Like, I really want to. But the thing is, I have a really hard time justifying paying sooo much money for it. I guess I'm just looking for somebody to sell me on it. (No pun intended.)
Anyone?
Goblin Squad Member
|
The main reason to buy PFO right now is if you believe in the vision and want Goblinworks to have the time and resources they need to continue development.
The game can be a lot of fun if you're hooked up with a vibrant community, but it's pretty rough around the edges and is different enough from other MMOs that it will take some serious effort to understand how things work.
Sooo much money?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think mmo-rpg's have the most attractive advantage in all genres of games (perhaps excluding games that are conducive to skill or modding skill ie skill games) and that's the persistence of social online communities and sharing of the same story experiences.
If you're looking for a mmo-rpg, then PFO by design has a chance of providing that. Right now I'd however say it appears imo to be a distant dream, during the Early Enrollment as the devs are developing every so many weeks.
However if you're sure the game is going to be a long-term playing experience then the reason to buy now is to start accruing XP in your characters and playing and building up connections in game - despite the glaring issues present atm.
I have to say PFO has SO MUCH GOING FOR IT; in particular the IP is literally and figuratively out of this world good quality. From that pov you can judge your future return in value on PFO. However, from the other pov, imho the big challenge that's going to make or break PFO is the EQ/WOW Engine or scale of the game of avatars running around that has become the de facto since UO->EQ 3D over-the-shoulder-perspective.
Imo this is the core game design area that needs to be innovated on that is being used as the standard, expected basis for all the great design work that GW has envisioned. I personally think that horse has run it's race with WOW and we need revolution via a new SCALE of game that matches WHAT is USP about MMO- genre that other genres cannot provide; where they actually can provide superior in many other areas now that this old model of mmorpgs still tries to develop.
Anyway, I'll jump off my hobby-horse, that's why I'm selling an a/c
WTS Destiny's Twin Account (unused; 7 months of game time, full daily deals...)
Should PFO capture the market share the above value of account will be much higher than what I am selling it for today. However I don't think that market is there any more as I explained above, so I think the a/c will still rise in value as the population of PFO increases, just not the stellar WOW-like success that alternatively could materialize.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I have to say PFO has SO MUCH GOING FOR IT; in particular the IP is literally and figuratively out of this world good quality.Except there is absolutely nothing even remotely about PF, in PFO.
You must excuse Audoucet, he is some of the disillusioned that believe they must destroy PFO because it didn't suit their needs. You have to take whatever he says and a few others with several grains of salt.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I have to say PFO has SO MUCH GOING FOR IT; in particular the IP is literally and figuratively out of this world good quality.Except there is absolutely nothing even remotely about PF, in PFO.
I'm not sure how much traction the fact Pathfinder is top PnP product has in the digital computer game space; I imagine some but not majorly? And that's part of the point I'm making above. You can guarantee the team will design the art, the inheritance of how things are from the awesome pedigree they have access to. It is worth emphasizing that, I was thinking of alternatives to the design changes I suggested in the other thread on SCALE and it's not easy bar IP's Game Of Thrones or Pathfinder; in fact Pathfinder would be more preferable due to more richness to tamper around with (I'd enjoy this whole other conversation if there was space and time for it!).
The other side it has a lot going for it, is the design is still the best I think of any current fantasy mmorpg in development or market. The implementation is what you are suggesting is lacking and that's true. But I think the diversity of buildings for settlements could look really good as could the diversity of mobs from Pathfinder and items and so on.
It's better to think of this Pathfinder Kingdoms Online (PKO) as like an ant-farm or eco-carium on a digital screen that players are managing this growing and living digital world with cycles of time and generations and so on...
The AP's more like the roguelike, torchbearer, darkest dungeon and AP stuff. Think how interesting the Emerald Tower could be with many levels (use procedural changes); Adventurers could probably takle the earlier levels in their lives, then later on other levels... it could be a gruelling and excruciating expedition to undertake
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What is Pathfinder? it is a game system
What are the River Kingdoms? they are the setting
What aspects of PFO can be directly traced to Pathfinder, and uniquely Pathfinder?
What in PFO can you point to and say? "Yes, this is definitely feeling like I'm playing in the River Kingdoms".
I'm not asking these questions for the position that there are no positive answers. The OP is asking to be convinced before buying. If the Pathfinder IP is important to him, and the setting is appealing, is it possible to point out the traits of the game that are uniquely tied to both game and setting?
I direct these questions to Paizo / Goblin Works as well.
To compare it to other games with strong IPs, please look at Lord of the Rings Online and or Star Wars the Old Republic or Star Trek Online.
Enter any one of those games and ask yourself, does this feel like I am in a world based on those IPs?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Those are absolutely solid questions, Bludd.
In my experience the one thing you do get in spades is the "visuals" and "veneer" of those IPs. However the actual "experience", THAT is the question (to borrow Hamlet's line)... so what is the experience that PFO as per it's game design document and as per it's pathfinder tradition of roots all leading towards providing as a product for players?
It is this:-
I keep banging this drum so much so someone's going shriek at the top of their lungs: "Will you stu, already banging on and on about... ." But Pathfinder Online is:-
* Adventure = adventurers archetypes small party squad combat dungeons
* Exploration = creation of huge wilderness ecosystems, mobs, resources
* Development = settlements, roles, social pyriamids, economics
* Domination = rts armies units, mass pvp, grand strategy
3 of those pillars 2-4 = KINGMAKER Pathfinder
1 of those pillars 1 = Pen & Paper Pathfinder
And I believe that's exactly verbatim what Ryan said way back. Now here's the interesting thing:-
Effectively appreciating the harmony between Design Doc + Kingmaker Roots + Engine => "The Experience" being sold to the player market, resolves the aesthetic discordance that plagues PFO and all are derived from the synergy of the above:-
1. Change Scale, sell at RTS Engine Scale of Kingmaker Pathfinder Online: This means it's it's OWN THANG!! It's not WOW 2.0, it's not Fantasy EVE, it's not "Not Pathfinder!" it's not competing with all the other themepark, sandbox EQ/WOW mmorpgs with huge budgets either...
2. This has the positive by-product of removing the awful nonsense to be endured in mmo forums concerning PvP: It removes PERSONAL and makes it more IMPERSONAL atst as INNOVATIVE via Family System and rejigging pvp rules into sandbox containers and more social-climbing competition as the fluid and flexible open-world competition to go with the combat snadboxed containers for PvP (Accurate name: Competition > Direct Combat Mechanics > Avatar loss on your balance sheet condition) - this has been killing PFO in negative publicity from day 1. Side-step it and even better SURPASS this criticism!!
3. Reconnect with the Pathfinder AP's and PnP market via the Adventure pillar being exclusive to Archetype Party sub-game within a game roguelike ish simulation fidelity to TT.
4. This Sim-Life de-emphasis the combat skill required for PvP; it emphasises the explosion of ROLES that Ryan's keen to add to Pathfinder eg diplomat, merchant and so on (they're all kingdom scale roles) tinker tailor soldier spy...
5. Players via Family Persona management can then choose non-combat gameplay (eg [fishing, farming](http://www.reddit.com/r/MMORPG/comments/33uvsy/lf_mmo_with_fishing_and_far ming/) and delegate combat to PvP players eg soldiers raised to send to battle RTS
6. Add PvP players in sandboxed containers: Eg Barbarians in the wild killing as they wish (or use Alignment + here), Soldiers via war units and so on...
7. All that is good basis for players to try to claim their own parcels of land (limited within realms) and scale up (Cities can have large number of buildings that players can then as peasant Families claim to ekk out their path to grander things eg Holdings Feudal with peasant families employed and upwards to the Throne. Settlements of huge scale, wilderness of even larger geogrpahical epic scale and procedural death of monsters and so on these are going to sell PFO.
The other thing is, this re-imagining will freshen things up with 6 month life-times and 3 month marriage regen cycles, opening up new gameplay experiences instead of the stade and stale conventions of the EQ/WOW Engine. Not only does it not have to compete with the other trend in the market, it is also in it's own niche. Atm PFO looks like any other indie mmorpg or EQ/WOW mmorpg but with much less polish and interested people mainly complaining:-
1. Payment does not match value, performance or fun as compared with bigger budget mmos.
2. PvP combat skill and Guild commitment is too hardcore
3. It's not even Pathfinder.
These = Discordance natural derivation from the mismatch in Aesthetic.
I admit still going to be a hard sell to players spoilt by the revolution in graphics 3D Engines for this genre... but it's enough to conducive to complexity and slow growth and sucking up a real need service to provide a differentiated product in the market and evolve the story-telling devices in this medium.
Star Citizen = WOW 2.0
Pathfinder Kingmaker Online = EVE 2.0
Note: WOD was always doomed as soon as it tried to go the EQ/WOW Engine route at 70m$
To re-emphasise (you can skip workings..) effectively with the EQ/WOW Engine EVERYONE is confusing PFO as PnP Pathfinder when in reality the vast majority of it via the design docs and world building scope is ie 3/4ths or 75% is KINGMAKER PATHFINDER! = RTS Engine match.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Don't do it. It's a trap.
A trap for whom?
A trap for the OP?
A trap for Paizo / GW to attempt to answer my questions?
If it is either, than things for PFO are worse off then what many would like to admit.
Here are a few suggestions for Paizo / GW:
1a. The lore fragments, are a great idea if they in fact are uniquely tied to PF or specifically the River Kingdoms' lore. My issue is, I have yet to see anything specific to the River Kingdoms (ie. no mention yet of Outlaw Council, The River Freedoms or banditry, etc.)
1b. Characters should have a Lore section, that can record the pieces of lore they have come across. So for instance, say I complete a portion of an escalation, the escalation message changes to reflect that, and that should be updated in a journal or lore record.
1c. Libraries in settlements or as holdings should have a publicly view able section, where characters can fill in the holes in their knowledge. If a character gains a new piece of knowledge the company that controls the settlement / holding gains some influence.
2. Not to sound petty with graphics, but the rivers in the River Kingdoms, should have water by now!!
3. Factions should reflect the written culture of the River Kingdoms (see River Kingdoms Guide). Service to those factions should not only require adherence to those factions' lore, but also not have penalties or rewards attached to either living up to those ideals or breaking from them.
I can understand now why, a few years back, it was stated that changes or stories in PF RPG could flow into PFO, but not vice versa. The present community of PFO is not nearly chaotic enough or neutral enough to really represent what Paizo should want to flow back into PF RPG for anything to change the River Kingdoms on the Paizo side of the house.
Do you think Elves can peacefully live in Mordor? Then why is there an over abundance of Neutral Good, Lawful Neutral and Lawful Evil in the River Kingdoms?
What the game is missing is that atmosphere / role playing element that is unique to PF / RK, in my opinion. It plays like a generic MMO in a generic game setting with elves, dwarves, humans, goblins and ogres. Reminds me more of GURPS than anything specific.
Try the buddy key you were offered.
The game is still in a very primitive state, but there is also a lot of fun to be had.
Or wait to play at Open Enrollment if you want a more polished game.
I haven't played PF so I have no input to offer in that respect.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Try the buddy key you were offered.
The game is still in a very primitive state, but there is also a lot of fun to be had.
Or wait to play at Open Enrollment if you want a more polished game.
I haven't played PF so I have no input to offer in that respect.
Wasn't the game already opened up to those Kick Starters that had OE accounts ($30.00)?
Head Start
$30.00
* Head Start Access
* Game Client Download
* 1 Month of Game Time
* Goblin Squad Membership
I believe the lines between Alpha, Beta, Early Enrollment, Head Start and Open Enrollment have been blurred to the point that no one, including GW, knows what to call it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What is Pathfinder? it is a game system
What are the River Kingdoms? they are the settingWhat aspects of PFO can be directly traced to Pathfinder, and uniquely Pathfinder?
What in PFO can you point to and say? "Yes, this is definitely feeling like I'm playing in the River Kingdoms".
I'm not asking these questions for the position that there are no positive answers. The OP is asking to be convinced before buying. If the Pathfinder IP is important to him, and the setting is appealing, is it possible to point out the traits of the game that are uniquely tied to both game and setting?
I direct these questions to Paizo / Goblin Works as well.
To compare it to other games with strong IPs, please look at Lord of the Rings Online and or Star Wars the Old Republic or Star Trek Online.
Enter any one of those games and ask yourself, does this feel like I am in a world based on those IPs?
I think this is worth reply to directly and within the questions' own horizons (the four pillar thing is useful but another conceptual landscape).
I think a great deal can be found from Raph Koster's recent comments on SWG. In that it seems that they were able to go BEYOND what was even in the SW story and expand the world in many ways.
He talks about the basis for being able to build a world, even a world beyond what is originally described:-
Even then, though, all of this is only there to serve as the basis for the rest of building a real society. The world isn’t only about stuff after all. In part two I’ll talk about social professions, downtime, missions, mentoring, and politicians — all the other things that go into making a world feel real. All this is just the beginning.
But this itself is built off the foundations, such as PFO's GDD with
Just Passing Time
It seems a simple thing really: the passage of time. But in fact, the time scale of a virtual world is as important as the scale for length, width, and height. As we discussed what the scale of time should be in Pathfinder Online, in the context of designing for a single server, these were factors we considered:
[LIST]
Players should not be forced to play in a constant state of day or night based on their local time
Golarion has four seasons just like Earth, and there is value in reproducing those seasons in the game—for the sake of immersion and the value in storytelling, and also for marketing and promotions
Distance creates value, in that time is required to transport objects across it; also, when initiating or responding to aggression, distance adds strategic complexity to the game... but the time to cross long distances can also be boring and creates a reason to quit playing the game The following represents the current design of the game and is, as always, subject to change based on community feedback, future design work, and playtesting.
Koster also notes this in:-
Actual size isn’t the only factor, of course. The granularity of the world matters too. You can have a 16km x 16km world with tiles that are a kilometer in size, and it’s going to take up the same data space as a 16 meter by 16m world. You can also have a game world like that of Eve Online where the vast vast majority of it is empty space; they procedurally generated theirs too, and as a little homage to Douglas Adams, the seed value for their procedural galaxy is the number 42. And it matters whether you can change this world; if it’s rolled up from a seed value, then you can’t exactly go carve a hole in it without storing the actual map in memory. This leads players to spend lots of time debating the right way to measure game world size.
To cross-reference, this is what I'm calling Exploration above. But to return to The River Kingdoms specifically according to this IP's world-building which informs the actual lore in the game:-
The Crusader Road
An endless stream of adventurers travels the Sellen River to confront the demonic menace at the Worldwound. And just as with Earth's historic crusades, a large number of other folks travel with them: camp followers, traders, thieves. However, there's a problem: an unknown factor has increased the monstrous activity in Mosswater such that it now threatens safety along the Sellen, and the river is impassable near the former town. Crusaders and their fellow travelers have to make an overland detour into the River Kingdoms, creating a constantly shifting population of transients along with more permanent residents who establish services to support the northward migration. Thus, this area has become a rich source of trade, conflict and territorial disputes.
The northern portion of the area is overseen by the righteous and lawful Knights of Iomedae, operating from a stronghold known as Fort Riverwatch. The southern approach is guarded by the ruthless Hellknights, enforcing their rule from Fort Inevitable. And from within the depths of the Echo Wood, a wretched hive of scum and villainy exerts control over much of the forest.
Between these three NPC factions are vast expanses of wilderness claimed by no power, ripe for development by those capable of taking and holding the land against the forces arrayed in opposition to them.
A variety of creatures live in this area. The wilderness is home to tribes of monstrous humanoids, and all manner of magical beasts make lairs in the forest. Undead infest ruins and graveyards. Below the surface lie unending caverns guarded by aberrations. And a few dragons are known to live in seclusion, sleeping on huge mounds of treasure.
To master these lands, players will need to harvest and make use of a wide variety of resources: cutting timber, mining ore, skinning hides, and gathering crops. These resources will need to be processed into materials that in turn can be crafted to create the weapons, vehicles, structures, and consumables that form the heart of the economic system. Combined with rare and exotic materials recovered by explorers who dare to confront the monsters and opposing players in the wilderness, all manner of gear both magical and mundane will circulate within the economy.
Exploration, Development, Adventure and Domination
Interestingly those 4 pillars pop up (I did not remember that). But that's academic, the main thing is the take-homes:-
We should have huge NPC Cities for the factions from this description. This and "The Clearing" could all be conducive to the beginning of PFO. I still think this description is quite Kingdom level. In fact those maps make me think the area is vast and epic and sweeping ideally with some decent height variables.
Interestingly the "chore of long travel distance" imo this needs the option of:-
If: Roads,
Then: AI automate caravan progress
While: open to bandits
No such option for no roads. Main thing is to automate grindy stuff and let players stick to making interesting risk-reward and such decisions Times can be very long this way. Procedural changing landscape around roads ie wilderness = unmapped! In such a change any players could be instanced off if using area during changes... the other thing is the dangerous denizens, requiring solid regiment of soldiers to protect and escort caravans for trade. At higher level the player is managing various roles. Again I think what you want is all this to stimulate players into feeling like the world is an immense, dangerous, magical place where their charges' lives hang on surviving and prospering and then powermongering in the face of a harsh world full of riches and promises where players are able to forge allliances and protect force around themselves successfully... ie civilization clusters realms between the inter-galactic aka inter-realm wildernesses.
With larger distances, the roads can be persistence amid the procedural changes so that different routes may have to be forged and broken a lot (think eve can work like this).
Right back to the lore again, these stable landmarks can be indirectly influential on the realms and their wars: The geopolitical powers charging the proxy wars of the realms to put it in perspective. Those Iomede Knights in the North...
One of the BIGGEST failings in fantasy mmorpgs is generic races are skins only. I think this is terrible and each time cheapens fantasy!
With marriage system you mainly keep to intra-race breeding, different ages, different birth rates, different base stats for random character generations and ideally it forges different race settlements but some cosmopolitan too - notably along the rivers for ships.
If the actual avatars are smaller and more generic, they can have unique faces in portraits as well as rigorous naming conventinos. Over time aging algorithm can change the portraits.
Atm you have the generic Char customization: Choose elf, dorf, human and big-deal read about the differences. Well breeding is a major difference for future complications and decisions for one. This can then lead to different ARCHITECTURE being made for racial settlements and slants on that onwards. I'd add dwarfs affinity to moutains, elves to woods, humans to settlements perhaps, etc. Even different formations for armies etc.
Many areas for dischord:-
* Races
* Alignments
* Realms
* Geopolitical NPC superpowers using proxy wars of the above
Adventurers taken care of with dungeons and special training unlocking.
Raph's other blog goes into the right direction next:-
There was every expectation that combat was still going to be at the heart of the game. Few social MMOs were out there at the time, though they were achieving impressive numbers. Second Life did not yet exist when we began (they actually came to visit me at the office during the early development of SWG, to talk social design and tech). The skills and actions available were dominated by fighting, and this was by and large what the market expected.
However, we could still try to reinvent what people thought fighting meant. In the classic Diku model that players were used to, you basically had classes that were alternate types of damage-dealers. Some dealt it fast, some slow. Some could take a lot of hits, some only a few. Today we think of these as tanks and nukers. The lone support class was the healer type, who basically replenished the combatants so that they could keep going: basically, an indirect damage-dealer more than someone who actually healed.
[...]
The result should have been not unlike a tactical card game: executing specials targeted at trying to undermine your opponent, pushing into stances, getting skills that allowed you to tumble from prone to standing quickly again, and so on. Riflemen standing well back, sniping carefully into the melee, with stealthed commandos sneaking around back to take them out. As you burned through your bars using your specials you made yourself briefly vulnerable, as your HAM bars bounced back up quickly, so an attacker looked to hit your weak spot right after you did something cool; basically, every attack you could make “lowered your shields.” And as you were hit, you’d gradually run out of ability to use specials, as your HAM bars’ maximum shrank from actual “wounds.” If someone hit zero, they were only temporarily stunned, and others could run in, drag them to safety or stim them back up with some quick field medicine before an opponent rushed in to give a killing blow.
Right about now, to any player of SWG, what I have described in tandem with the “bouncy” nature of HAM as I originally pictured it, is probably sounding completely unfamiliar to them. And that’s because combat in SWG was a disaster.
What strikes me that succeeded was the plethora of roles in SWG. The combat was very taxing to code. It needs to for Pathfinder be sandboxed into the Adventurer Archetypes Pillar for those special/very prestigious classes in the game those rare heroes/exceptionals PROPORTIONALLY REPRESENTED CORRECTED in the game's population. Here is where the RTS Scale again shines, with most of players cadre/cast/charges of characters doing the many economic roles and other such like that have SO MUCH POTENTIAL as per Raph's SWG creations in the above blog.
Tl;DRHalf the question is simulating Pathfinder into digital 3D representation. The other half is allowing players SELF-EXPRESSION opportunities in multitudinous ways within that representation ie half of what is Pathfinder is the players building those living systems (aka sim life) on top of the dynamic world to borrow Raph's coinage.
To extend the question Bludd poses: The same principles hold for those other IPs: Star Wars, Star Trek, Elder Scrolls, Lord Of The Rings Online... to measure how successful they feed back into those world-buildings - or not?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For those new to the lore of the main Pathfinder setting, Golarion, there is an ongoing class series by Cheatle looking at the background of some of the main Escalations and how they tie into the broader world's interest into the River Kingdoms that we play in. Examples such as the Razmirian threats and the Ustalavs. Obviously the classes are available in game, but also in Mumble and are often reposted on YouTube.
While it's regrettable in a sense, most people who are actively playing don't frequent these boards anymore. They spend more time on the GW forums. Those looking for answers regarding the current game would best be served asking there. The most frequent posters here now often seem to be those the game literally left behind...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
To return to the OP:
1. They asked very nicely so it is worth trying answer - perhaps the OP is observing the answers.
2. The question is perfect to pose from 1 to many: What is the answer tailored for the OP perosnally? And what is the answer extrapolated to the market of potential players who might ask essentially exactly the same question and hence how can PFO as a game self-answer ie "A Good Game Sells Itself".
3. You provided useful info and eg of the excellent community here I've always been impressed by.
Now good knows "I've gone off on one..." but to shrink it down to the answers I provided:-
1. The OP is PnP PF background from post history. I suggested the only way to really square THAT system with PFO is change scale and provide that 4th odd one out pillar as specific to archetype adventurers.
2. Else the rest of the game is Pathfinder Kingdoms related.
3. The problem is the current PFO is mish-mash of the 2 and not atm either. This problem can be called "The dischord of aesthetic".
This is as honest as I can be and it serves me no advantage "to undersell PFO" quite the opposite at present.
While it's regrettable in a sense, most people who are actively playing don't frequent these boards anymore. They spend more time on the GW forums. Those looking for answers regarding the current game would best be served asking there. The most frequent posters here now often seem to be those the game literally left behind...
Now to address here:-
Ryan predicted some players attracted to PFO would be "after the next new thing"; and their surge is forwards of the rest of the market and natural churn would see them move onto "the next futurology thing" if you like.
However interesting that is to know, here's a useful observation that PFO needs to be successful:-
At present this is the core challenge/status of PFO:-
1. Day 1: FFA PvP bad press
2. Day 2: PnP PF not mightily impressed it's not catering to PnP more
3. Day 3: Sub + substandard release = I'll take my custom elsewhere
If you have PvP then it has to be good combat and integrated with many systems. This already labels it against the ethos of PnP "so THEY say". But the PvP players are saying it's not enough PvP and it's too expensive and others are saying it's impossible to recruit for.
Ok, what needs to be done to be able to recommend PFO to people
1. The emphasis on Combat has go^&. I've seen WAR, GW2 etc all have major issues trying to get combat to work/be fun. Secondly the PvP label has be surpassed to remove the bad press. Now PFO does have the solutions:-
* Fishing
* Farming
* Labouring
* Merchanting
* Contracting and Guards
* It needs the things at Kingmaker scale that make it stand out: Politics, settlements and buildings buzzing with life
2. I think the solution to combat de-emphasis is classes in the Adventure pillar and it serves the PnP crowd and it hopefully works towards the modding crowd and story-telling bespoke stuff of adventures meanwhile integrting above.
3. Players have to be creating incredulous stories to pay during EE:-
* For their own fun
* For word of mouth
* People have an instinct to find a good thing and want to tell others about that good thing, to be the one who was known to tell others about a good thing to be had. ;-)
Imo with 3. it can only happen with the correctives of 1. and 2. Otherwise the course set is:-
>Constant battle against PvP politics
>Constant battle to get extremely high quality combat mechanics
>Constant battle against graphics comparisons with other games
>Constant battle against the sub naysayers
>Constant battle with genres that are mmo-ifying but retaining stronger design in their actual sub-specialization genre than the broader mmorpgs do
>Constant battle with all the other EQ/WOW mmorpgs: AA, Crowfall, EQN and other variations: SotA, GV, Life Is Feudal
PFO may be able to grab some of the market, but the fights are going to be severe following this course.
Here's the problem: The market says this is STILL WHAT PEOPLE WANT TODAY according to tech/budget restrictions... but themepark or sandbox, this engine makes the whole experience feel like it's the same thing, the same tropes, the same conventions, the same basic assumptions.
Imo, by changing something as simple but pervasive as the scale, ie simplification or "parsimony" leads to new ways of seeing and experiencing these stories.
&: You can make better quality squad combat in the Adventurers pillar meanwhile that tailors to a vital market for PFO and easier to dev/balance ON THE SIDE OF what should more or less be called the "Bread & Butter Roles (lol!) of Economic sausage" at the heart of the game. Now the PvP can be sandboxed in little by little in "containers" you can now funnel the pvp crowd and control them either broadly (Go play baa-baas in the wild woods eg) or vertically "With power comes great industry and responsibility".
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What it is not:
- it is not PnP/TT Pathfinder rules migrated to a computer game - think more "Golarion" online.
- it is not EVE style crazy small gang PvP in a fantasy setting
- it is not a game overly suited to min/max single role play longterm as there is no XP cap just role caps. Nor does it really suit solo play though you can play solo.
- it is not a finished polished game.
What it is:
- it is a chance to be involved early and (providing your not trying to get the game transformed into something totally different like a WoW clone, themepark NwN clone or an arena PvP game) have a fair chance of influencing the game development
- it is an opportunity to get involved in creating and developing one of the player communities that will be influential in the first few years of the game
- it is a chance to play early and experiment and gain valuable experience. (already accounts that have XP backdated to 1st January are attracting twice what they were selling for just 2 months ago)
- if you join a larger reasonably active group it is actually very fun and very addictive for many people.
Best advice from above - get a 2 week trial join a group straight away (Pathfinder university is a good choice if you do not already have friends in a settlement) and play and see.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
One of the ideas that is floating about as per Bludd's question but also mentioned in some of the replies is:-
>"Q: How much of Pathfinder is in PFO?"
It's a crucial question. Being almost purely functional you could say, one of the strongest marketing assets of PFO is that it has this background IP except in design from translating to MMO it's a completely different game system.
I think then the feel of Pathfinder is asked. The response has been "there's lore, there's story, players can go read up in a libary, the art etc and world setting are based here."
This again I think is not a good answer or not making the most of what could be and that's the same problem with themeparks of other IPs. The SWG Jedi story A Jedi Saga ~ by Raph Koster is a perfect perfect example of bad design decisions due to a lack of boldness and pandering to "market rationale reasoning", instead of sticking to the LOGIC you derive from working within the FRAMEWORK of UNITY OF AESTHETIC of the IP World Building itself meshing with the design challenges of the technology.
I mean reading about pathfinder or being told about it in game is such a poor substitute to the above method of elaboration of the world-building in it's new genre to adapt it correctly. It's mechanics aint' gonna work in service to story, they'll be fighting each other or else relegated, the one over the other. For example players need to be clicking in combat every so many minutes in game takes precedence over the story ie classes go out and farm mobs = "adventuring". Though in some fluff and you have so-called "story of the IP". However this is RP, not PAR, what is needed is PAR
You know what the entire PFO endeavour really is all about?
It's taking Pathfinder (a game world for small groups of players) and transplanting that game world into a game world for thousands upon thousands of players.
You can make a decision: Try to make all those populations heroes Archetypes or you can try to make a world with a proportional population. You can do that with One Player = One Character with alts or you can instead share the roles players can dabble in based off the pyriamid of many workers at the bottom driving the economic engines per player upwards to specialization of roles as societies require overheads to manage larger numbers of members and institutions around those functions.
What story we wan to tell in PFO is the epic tale, the match to network capacity of shared game space of mmo- technology. I honestly think if there's any prototype existing of this MMO- revolution it's Dwarf Fortress. Just soup up the graphics to 3D on an Epic Scale of perspective and add the MMO- networking and run the simulation of gross systems all inter-connecting eg generations, food, mortality, biography, seasons...
Looking at the recent comments in forums on PFO, the fight is the wrong battle. The players are totally clueless about what they want and hence the developers take the wrong cues to develop the wrong engines to represent the wrong types of gameplay to create story in the heads of the players that can combine better with community building around the game.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The argument that this is more Golarion Online rather than Pathfinder is a false argument. It is making an excuse for the lack of use of the IP, other than its label.
How do you separate Golarion from Pathfinder, and the River Kingdoms from Golarion?
I made several suggestions above that i believe would add some of the uniqueness of the River Kingdoms. That has not been commented on yet
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The Iomede and other NPC center stuff is perfect to entice PnP players if the Archetypes were focused on the Adventure Pillar as mentioned. And RTS Scale to make huge cities, is one opinion.
However, to turn the question back around to the OP instead of "how I cannot sell it", "How I can sell it - if the above conditions were met," then it would be like Ryan already did:-
What sold PFO to me was:-
1. Can choose many different roles: Spy, Soldier, Merchant or crafter or diplomat.
2. We're expanding above PF to make the world around the adventurer experience to fit within that context.
Those are all things I suggested via the above that align with that focus. The trouble is the focus is now on the tropes of EQ/WOW Engine mmorpgs: Combat, Graphics, PvP and the quality of those let alone their desirablity or as is the key here: FOCUS which is for me and I thin for many others 1. and 2. above should be dev'd then you can easily sell EE to players.
If you did that you could really flesh out the details of Riverkingdoms eg Iomede, Bandits in the THornkeep, Emerald Spire uber dungeons for adventurers squad team party combat on that scale with mortality and injury and expedition requirements eg food and so on. Different critters reacting to diff alignment players etc.
Hey everyone,
So, I really want to get Pathfinder Online. Like, I really want to. But the thing is, I have a really hard time justifying paying sooo much money for it. I guess I'm just looking for somebody to sell me on it. (No pun intended.)
Anyone?
The game is only 30$ at this point and that includes your first month of playtime so it's really about average in terms of price these days.
I would take their suggestion and give the 15-day free trial a whirl.
But don't get tunnel vision. This is one of many sandboxes in development right now, most of which are fantasy themed. Take the time to read up on and watch reviews for games like Star Citizen, Crowfall, Life is Feudal, ArcheAge, Shroud of The Avatar, Camalot Unchained, EVE, and even some older titles like Darkfall and Wurm Online.
There is some particularly exciting stuff going on in the industry today you really need to check out before committing to the long haul for any MMO, and if you're paying 15$ a month for this game without the long haul in mind you are crazy.
If you've played the 15 day trial and researched/tried those titles and still believe PFO is the best then it's probably worth 30$ to you.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
And yet, you're selling your account.What sold PFO to me was:-
1. Can choose many different roles: Spy, Soldier, Merchant or crafter or diplomat.
2. We're expanding above PF to make the world around the adventurer experience to fit within that context.
It's sad that this game didn't work out for you, but your bitterness and attitude is much more disheartening.
Perhaps it's time to move on man.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
And yet, you're selling your account.What sold PFO to me was:-
1. Can choose many different roles: Spy, Soldier, Merchant or crafter or diplomat.
2. We're expanding above PF to make the world around the adventurer experience to fit within that context.
I was never "comfortable" with a couple of things, but simply decided to bow to greater knowledge and experience; these were:-
1. Perspective ie I thought maybe isometric but even that was not good enough back in early 2012.
2. I was concerned that TT combat was too stale but that for this type of project it was a technological necessity.
3. I did not like the idea of characters bloating in power over time and multi-cross-training that came.
Of course back then I did not see any solutions because the paradigm I was assuming was the standard one. Now I think I've seen a new paradigm and from that derive solutions to the above; but not only that they also KEEP THE FOCUS on the 2 things that really sold the concept of PFO to me:- The diverse roles, the idea that the adventurers takes place in the wider simulation of the fantasy world.
PFO can still achieve those things with growth. But I think the problems are as above described eg the immense work required on combat and graphics.
It should be explicit: PFO has about 9/10ths right with it's design thanks to Ryan and the team. But this genre is brutal. The missing 1/10th I suggest is:-
1. Scale Change (RTS Engine)
2. Avatar Change (Family System)
3. Skill-Training Change per Character (finite, limited capacity) - expand the roles, this then also nullifies PvP issues which can be dev'ed in via sandboxed containers.
4. Pricing Change (Variable Sub on Family Size)
5. Archetypes Adventure system closer to PnP where combat can be deeper work on in that context.
6. Change the Map as per 1. procedural inter-galactic wilderness between islands of Realms (should be scalable) for the Kingdoms (x3 pillars) game.
These achieve:-
1. Adventurerers in context of River Kingdoms World Building; brings in the PnP core crowd who are needed.
2. Diverse Roles; suck in a larger market
3. Resolves PvP bad politics of release.
4. Removes the competition of graphics and combat balancing nightmare
5. In time more of the players' good ideas can be dev'd in.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
Perhaps it's time to move on man.Actually, I don't come here very much any more, but when I see Ryan talking nonsense on MMORPG.com, I can't help it.
And to be honest, I consider that the 1500$ I gave to this game make my occasional complaining worth it for GW.
How much did you get for reselling the platinum account?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
None of this particularly helps the OP.
To the OP:
1. Get a 2 week buddy trial.
2. Join a group straight away. If you have no existing friends in game just join PFU.
( The game is not meant to be played solo, though you can do it. It is more fun and can be very addictive with the right people to go out with. )
3. If you like it sub. If not polished enough for you, give it a few months and get another trial and try again.