Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The funnel of suck was too effective and found in too many aspects of the game.
Just way too many problems with the game, that started with its marketing and continued all the way through to its implementation. Nearly complete failure in its vision, which never appealed to enough people to ever produce a viable product.
If they truly shot for EvE with Swords, it would have had a better chance. But thebgane engine would still have been a major stumbling block. Monetization was also a major mistake, and the play of words as to the stage of the game led to the terrible reviews that the game received.
All of these decisions became the real "funnel of suck".
Hopefully Paizo will be smart enough to undo some of the damage, by first declaring the game is in an Early Stage of Alpha. They should suspend the subscription fee, until major changes have been reached, including and most importantly a whole new game engine. The current engine has no future, it is obsolete and can not compete with games made since 2009.
I feel like the Funnel of Suck was destroyed with the implementation of "Universal Support to 20".Me too.
Heck, even *I* agree with that one.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Heck, even *I* agree with that one.
I feel like the Funnel of Suck was destroyed with the implementation of "Universal Support to 20".Me too.
They did that in an effort to stop bleeding subscriptions. The idea of tying players to a specific location (ie settlement) was never a good idea.
Settlements are locations and not social structures, it runs counter to the gaming community, and I tried to explain that to Ryan but he was too daft to get it.
The Reputation system was going to fail to deter abusers, once their training time exceeded the time it took to recover reputation. Again, I tried to explain that, but it fell on deaf and foolish ears.
Meanwhile in other MMOs that went the opposite direction, were outperforming PFO in almost every aspect. They went sandbox, but also did not look to limit PVP, but rather expand it to a wider audience. In one case, even a dev openly ridiculed a gamer who asked for limitations and basically said "this isn't the game for care bears". That game boasted 40 times the population of PFO in its Summer Alpha.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My problem with this venture was the I enjoy Golarion and the creative team at Paizos work greatly. But somehow the MMO mistranslated that great work into a generic, bland, frankly boring game. Which was a huge shame.
I like many others cannot help but feel that licensing the world and IP to a maker of single player isometric view games would be very successful.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
IF lisa can steer this project through these rocks to the other side or find an investor or both, I would not be surprised if she is now double, triple or more reluctant than before to get into any computerized product around PFRPG.
I don't know her personally and it seems like she is more rational than that, but I wouldn't blame her. ;)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
IF lisa can steer this project through these rocks to the other side or find an investor or both, I would not be surprised if she is now double, triple or more reluctant than before to get into any computerized product around PFRPG.
I don't know her personally and it seems like she is more rational than that, but I wouldn't blame her. ;)
Bringslite, if you want some insite into Lisa's professional chops, search out the paizocon and Gencon panels called "Auntie Lisa's Story Hour" they are great fun to listen to
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
If the PACG tablet port goes well, and I think that it will, I could see a joint venture including Obsidian. But the mechanics would have to be closer to Pillars of Eternity than Neverwinter Nights, unless you can pry the video game rights out of Hasbro's smart-business-decision hands.
Goblinworks Founder
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As an avid tabletop player of Pathfinder, I was hoping that Golarion would come to life in PFO. Obviously, it would be only a minor part of the game, but I wanted more theme park content than the funding would have allowed.
I liked a lot of the ideas behind the mechanics of the game, but was hoping that more of the tabletop system would have been preserved. With game balance needing to win, that hope was dashed pretty quickly.
I agree with the majority of the people here who stated that the execution was poor. Quite simply, after logging in the first time I was so disappointed that I didn't return to the game for days. The new player experience was awful. Simply awful.
I am so disappointed.
If you need inspiration for what I believe your current audience would enjoy try looking at original Ultima Online, Shadowbane, and Dungeons and Dragons Online. There's a sweet spot somewhere in between those games that would both make truckloads of money AND bring years of enjoyment to your most loyal supporters.
First, I just want to say that I have faith in this game. Honestly, out of all of the MMOs in production right now, I think PFO has the most potential. I've heard recently that some things are going to be changing soon, such as bringing on board a new investor. I'm hoping everything will go good and the game will evolve into something so much more. I believe Paizo (Goblins Works) can make an incredible MMO that millions could enjoy. However, I would say don't look at the past for inspiration. The games mentioned above are obsolete. Since PFO is supposed to be a modern sandbox game, why not draw inspiration from upcoming sandbox titles and put your own twist on it? Games such as: Everquest Next (assuming that game is still in production...), The Repopulation, and Albion Online. I think one thing that is lacking in current MMOs is variety and choice. When I play a sandbox MMO, I want to feel that I can literally do and be anything I want. Adventurer? Mercenary? Hero? Villain? Entertainer? Diplomat? Bandit/pirate? Governor? Merchant/trader? I want all of those options available to me. Just look at the table-top game. So many choices! So many different ways to create characters. When I first looked into PFO and saw everything they were promising, it sounded exactly like what I would want in a sandbox MMO. Then I saw the game. And was completely let down. I'm thinking early enrollment wasn't such a good idea, but thats just me. Anyways, here's to 2016 and hopefully the redemption of PFO! I'm counting on you guys! Give me the MMO I have always dreamed of playing.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
First, I just want to say that I have faith in this game. Honestly, out of all of the MMOs in production right now, I think PFO has the most potential.
The only way to fix the poor interface, bad graphics, lack of in-game content, and clumsy game mechanics is pretty much a complete rebuild from the ground up. I applaud them for going with a skill-based character development system over a level-based character development system, but that was the only thing that I believe was done well.
So yes, if they wish to rebuild the game and spend millions more money, then yes there is potential. Anything short of that, is flushing good money down the toilet.
While I enjoy the "sense of risk vs reward" that the pvp aspect brings in, bottom-line there are not enough pvp'rs out there to make this type of game a profitable venture, if the primary focus is pvp.
Neverwinter Online had/has the best model out there. (Too bad Mod 6 ruined the game and the player base). Neverwinter has:
- a plethora of unique quests
- several different scenarios/maps for pvp'rs
- great graphics
- unique in-game content (Each city and area has a unique look and feel to it.)
- great user customization (Great selection of pets that help in combat, and a great selection of mounts to ride -- heck I can have a gelatinous cube as a mount -- that pretty much says it all!)
- free to play (not a subscription-based model)
For any MMO to survive and prosper, you must have all of the above. Now in addition, if PFO did all the above, plus added in it's sandbox elements and it's skill-based character development, then I think you would have a winner. Add-in player housing that you can customize (such as in Ultima Online -- and I think Everquest Next was/is planning to do), then you could really have a great game with a personal touch.
Of course everything I described above requires money & time. So yes, if PFO (via their new developer) did all the above, then yes it would be a great game. Golarion is a world rich in content -- let's see it and experience it online!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
....
The only way to fix the poor interface, bad graphics, lack of in-game content, and clumsy game mechanics is pretty much a complete rebuild from the ground up. I applaud them for going with a skill-based character development system over a level-based character development system, but that was the only thing that I believe was done well.So yes, if they wish to rebuild the game and spend millions more money, then yes there is potential. Anything short of that, is flushing good money down the toilet.
While I can agree that a complete rebuild would likely be better, with some parts that are good can be salvaged to speed up development.
Though I would need to wonder how much time and resources would be needed to completely rebuild the game, and NOT have income from that new version, but maybe the old version. And how would you treat the customers that put in time and money into the old version and keeping it a float?And it would not be a wise idea to screw the paying customer over since they are paying the new company's paychecks...
While I enjoy the "sense of risk vs reward" that the pvp aspect brings in, bottom-line there are not enough pvp'rs out there to make this type of game a profitable venture, if the primary focus is pvp.
The whole EoX was pro-pvp and they added a spice to the game, and as much as I dislike it even Zycor added a spice to the day to day of the game while he was more active.
Neverwinter Online had/has the best model out there. (Too bad Mod 6 ruined the game and the player base). Neverwinter has:
- a plethora of unique quests
- several different scenarios/maps for pvp'rs
- great graphics
- unique in-game content (Each city and area has a unique look and feel to it.)
- great user customization (Great selection of pets that help in combat, and a great selection of mounts to ride -- heck I can have a gelatinous cube as a mount -- that pretty much says it all!)
- free to play (not a subscription-based model)For any MMO to survive and prosper, you must have all of the above. Now in addition, if PFO did all the above, plus added in it's sandbox elements and it's skill-based character development, then I think you would have a winner. Add-in player housing that you can customize (such as in Ultima Online -- and I think Everquest Next was/is planning to do), then you could really have a great game with a personal touch.
While you might think Neverwinter Online is a perfect starting model, it is not a perfect model for everyone and for every type of play.
Given the time and resources things should be toned down some and upgraded over time with the code being designed for the future systems for easy upgrade-ability.I do agree that it should have more; quests, scenarios, content and character customisation.
Heck, even DragonBall Xenoverse has more character customization than PFO.
But the F2P model will not work here, as it'll attract the cheap skate and P2W griefers like, bees to honey, and the subscription model means a steady income for the devs.
Of course everything I described above requires money & time. So yes, if PFO (via their new developer) did all the above, then yes it would be a great game. Golarion is a world rich in content -- let's see it and experience it online!
I don't think they would like to spend all there money in advance, and instead would enjoy some form of income to help pay the bills, and how long would we need to wait for this new version?
And games are not made over night, remember it took GW over a year to get the game into an alpha state, so how long would we need to wait for an alpha of the new version?|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...
While I enjoy the "sense of risk vs reward" that the pvp aspect brings in, bottom-line there are not enough pvp'rs out there to make this type of game a profitable venture, if the primary focus is pvp.The whole EoX was pro-pvp and they added a spice to the game, and as much as I dislike it even Zycor added a spice to the day to day of the game while he was more active.
I believe it went south when PvP essentially became the game and adventuring together receded to something that would be nice to have somewhere out beyond the horizon.
War between economic cooperatives is interesting more at a strategic level, and to me a strategic game doesn't fulfill the promise of pathfinder.
I believe that for this game to work there must be opportunities for adventuring at the party level. Clearing an area of Pinatas is not an adventure.
Unless the player is actively guiding the community, the strategic game is like backstory.