Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
My experience......
iceman00
Member Posts: 1,363
Some of the old timers that posted in the SWG forums might remember me. I decided to give this game a try....
And I believe that this game, like SWG once was, is a good game that has tremendous potential. Some compare this game to EVE. I do not think that is the case. For better or worse, EVE is an intensly complex game. Also, there are no corrupt GMs...... yet. :-p I think POTBS fits in the spectrum nicely between WoW (very easy, instant gratification), and EVE (bring out War and Peace to read while you play it). The ship combat is a very nice change, and there are multiple layers. You really have to be tactical to be successful in multi ship battles. The economy is incredibly deep. For those who have loved the free market economies in past games, you will love POTBS. (That happens to be me.) For those who want to know exactly where to get everything, this game won't appeal. (And that's not a slam, certain people don't want to invest a great deal of time, and still have fun. Games like WoW suit that purpose more.)
Yet for all its depth, there are still some glaring shortfalls. For a game so centered on the free market, good luck promoting yourself as a crafter. There's no sense of authenticity in your goods. Also, shopping at the auction house can be a truly annoying experience, as you don't know what the price is for the goods. It's not like a true auction house where you can just bid things up. What they need to do is show what goods are available at what price. Even better, who makes them.
As far as melee combat, its the attack of the rubber bands. This kills any real sense of immersion. While it's not that bad in boarding combat or missions, trucking through cities can be a real pain. Even when nobody is on, Bartica can be a lagfest.
Also, there's not a gigantic difference right now between the classes. In PvP, certainly certain professions are more geared towards certain roles, but freetraders obtain little if any economic advantage. (Advanced structure camps are only for the basic structures.) The idea that a naval officer should be an economic powerhouse strains credulity. Yes everyone should be able to make money, but that money should be diversified. This isn't a gigantic problem, but its something that is irritating. Give freetraders a real substantive bonus (i.e. give them more lots, or if you are feeling really draconian, limit crafting to freetraders.)
I think this game is good. It has the potential to be great. Most importantly, I'm glad to see they are taking a real step towards not being just like every other game. There has to be a way to fix that in melee combat.
My personal score would be a 7.5-8 out of 10, and I see no reason why this game shouldn't be a 9 without a few minor changes.
Comments
Permit me to ask have you reached the endgame? The fact you say nothing of that inclines me to believe you are low or mid level and that means you haven't seen the big problems that surface later on. One faction has no endgame (Pirates) except sitting in a red circle, other three factions also have port battles and that is abotu it unles you count in one very poorly made raid instance. People are leaving after a month or two of port battles because lo and behold at top level you can shot at ships and that is about it.
Yes, POTBS is between WoW and EVE and it achieves that by taking elements of various MMO's and mixing them together in one rather poor mash. Not to mention that, for example, EVE has superior economy and WoW superior linear structure. I fail to see what is so groundbreaking in this game save using of sailing ships. The game is, after all, listed as a fantasy game and its historic base is diluted at best. If it was fantasy game using mounted combat instead of ships it would be deemed a complete and utter failure.
The economy manufactures nothing but combat items for ship to ship combat. Majortiy of surviving societies equip themselves internally by utilising version of planned economy. The market is glutted, AH is cumbersome and war (touted strength) has no impact on trading as all AH's are accessible to almost anyone. Personally I don't think that makes a deep economy or emulates the free market. Even if, in theory, the simulated free market worked - the game is supposed to be placed in the period of mercantilism and that is quite different from free economy.
Game has lots of problems, shortcommings, flaws, and poor implementations. It is ship to ship combat with a mediocre and unblanced game attached to it. If that warrants 7.5 - 8 / 10 so be it but lots of gaming magazines and specialised sites awarded it similar ratings and it is generally accepted that those were little more then paid advertisements. Awarding 9 for minor changes is fine, but I would like to advocate that WoW be awarded 12 and EVE 15 on the same merit. I dislike both games but recognize them as success in their areas.
Strip the novelty of ship to ship combat and there is really little left. Personal opinion though.
Based on the fact this is your comments I thought it was pretty fair.
Here I have to strongly disagree.
You are able to see the last price paid for a good - in that respect it works like the sharemarket IRL.
Based on that you can make a decision if you think that price is valid and if you are prepared to pay that price yourself?
Then, you have the option to make a bid of any amount you think fair or that you think you can get away with ;-)
Sometimes you get a 'bargin' - but you are never forced to pay any price... just like an MMO Gamer... if the price or sub is higher than you are prepared to pay for a product you can walk away.
And I have a question based on your comment "What they need to do is show what goods are available at what price. Even better, who makes them."
Why do you need to know who makes them?
I think this is where reviewers and gamers have parted ways over the years.
When a reviewer says "7" these days it seems he means "mediocre" - unfortunately for a gamer (and most of the rest of the world) half of 10 is 5....
When a reviewer says "9" he seems to mean "it's very good" but gamers read a 9 as excellent bordering on perfect.
And when a reviewer says 10 he means "The last one in this series was a hit... (this is either HALO 4, a WoW expansion or the latest Far Cry with Direct X 10 features)... so I don't care if this puppy doesn't even install... I know which side my bread is buttered on... buggered if I will be rocking the boat!"
And players, for their part grow a little more cynical...
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
[quote]Originally posted by iceman00
I think this game is good. It has the potential to be great. Most importantly, I'm glad to see they are taking a real step towards not being just like every other game. There has to be a way to fix that in melee combat.
My personal score would be a 7.5-8 out of 10, and I see no reason why this game shouldn't be a 9 without a few minor changes.
[/quote]
he hasn't played this game
there are no comments on the avatar work
no comments on artwork
no comments on any real mechanics just a very general "opinion'
no real comments on anything
He makes a negative comment about the one thing that is in fact unique to this game and that does make it different and shows a basic lack of understanding of the AH system
He has not played this game if he has it was for under 15 minutes and he never got past the first few missions in thes starter town
I read this yesterday and was speechless. The fact of the matter is those that play the game honestly state on the boards even (the die hards) that "and this isn't even a very good game" and the only reason they stick arounds is because they made friends.
One thing this game is not is complex. It simpler then WoW and it certainly doesn't beat the epic failure everyone loves to hate which is SWG. If SWG was a failure with all that stuff in it and the massive avatar customization, the huge universe and complicated systems with more then one thing to do what does that make this along side it? People are returning to SWG right now in droves me included. Many of the people I met say the same thing "if SWG was a failure what does that make POTBS?" Maybe in the future it might be afull game. Many of us weer willing to wait till it is a full game. However right now its just a bare bones game that is incredibly simple and easy to use with only one purpose.
Avatar work = something I have held my tongue about for a long long time pales in comaparison to most older games out there that people have actualy played
Artwork = the places they have redecorated like tortuga are great the rest of the world which is tiny is made from a set of templates.
Combat = avcom AI is well not particularly intelligent either on ships or in the water. So for that reason the PVE game is incredibly easy to beat.
Class balance = there is none there is one all powerful class the rest serve not much of a purpose with the exception of the freetrader who's big bonus is to haul goods so he is slave to the naval class
Music is decent
Red ring system is presently broken and turned off
How in heck can you give this game an 8 or more ? when the only plus is has is decent artists who build cool towns right now?
Community
interface = horrible leads to isolation no hampers fluid gameplay the print and text are horrible half the community complains it can't see it .. its made for younger eyeballs..
Game mechanics are heavily instanced everything occurs in an instance causing a total lack of continuity in the world .
Exploration - there is none
I could go on but I hate to say it I think I have said enough and was holding back in hopes that things gameplay wise would improve
I never said the game was "groundbreaking" that's just you inserting words in my mouth. I said that some of the things they did was a refreshing change from the linear world, and I stand by that. Please, when critquing what I said, critque what I said.
Elsewhere I've stated this about the endgame. I think its absolutely absurd that you should be able to hit level 50 in a month. The fact that I criticized the auction house tells me your nothing but someone looking to cause trouble and flame a game he's disenfranchised with. On the one hand, you say the game isn't free market, and then you complain that the AH's are available to almost anyone. Such a wide exposure is typically a precondition of a free market, that cuts out the guild mentality of price fixing and "good ol boy clubs".
As far as societies working together, that in no way guts the chance at a free market. Most socities (at least on my server) do not MANDATE people produce this or that good at this or that price. They ask for suggestions, and ask that when dealing with others in society, the price be lowered. When other people in the society are selling for lower, you drop prices or find yourself out of the market. In other words, that sounds a lot like a free market and supply and demand to me.
If we're rating how WoW and EvE worked in their respective areas, then they would be rated higher (the fact that EvE has had a very large problem with corruption however limits that rating.) I don't like WoW. but I understand that Blizzard set out to do something, and what they set out to do was achieved beyond their expectations.
Here I have to strongly disagree.
You are able to see the last price paid for a good - in that respect it works like the sharemarket IRL.
Based on that you can make a decision if you think that price is valid and if you are prepared to pay that price yourself?
Then, you have the option to make a bid of any amount you think fair or that you think you can get away with ;-)
Sometimes you get a 'bargin' - but you are never forced to pay any price... just like an MMO Gamer... if the price or sub is higher than you are prepared to pay for a product you can walk away.
And I have a question based on your comment "What they need to do is show what goods are available at what price. Even better, who makes them."
Why do you need to know who makes them?
I think this is where reviewers and gamers have parted ways over the years.
When a reviewer says "7" these days it seems he means "mediocre" - unfortunately for a gamer (and most of the rest of the world) half of 10 is 5....
When a reviewer says "9" he seems to mean "it's very good" but gamers read a 9 as excellent bordering on perfect.
And when a reviewer says 10 he means "The last one in this series was a hit... (this is either HALO 4, a WoW expansion or the latest Far Cry with Direct X 10 features)... so I don't care if this puppy doesn't even install... I know which side my bread is buttered on... buggered if I will be rocking the boat!"
And players, for their part grow a little more cynical...
I was more concerned with that you only see "averages." Yes you can tell a sell history, but you can't tell how much is left at that available price in the sell history. As far as "who makes them", its called authenticity, and a sense of advertising. We had an armorsmith in SWG who was the dominant man on the server. If you see "made by Severius Drax" you knew you were getting the best stuff there was, and more importantly, that he always had the best stuff always available thanks to the way he setup things and ran things. Naval Officers get known in their second or first rates or via their ship. What way does a freetrader get known?
So let me get this straight. I haven't played the game because I don't mention things YOU dislike? Is that correct? I play 4 or 5 hours a night.
And an auction house is something that makes it different? I think not, WoW has an auction house, several other games have an auction house as well. The idea of an auction house doesn't make something new. The fact that the game is mostly craft based and a free market is not a "new" idea, but an idea that in the age of everyone trying to be like Wow people shied away from.
So I'll say this to the person above, if you are going to critque what I say, critque what I say, not what you want me to say so you can erect a straw man.
But it makes no difference who the crafter is in PotBS. Brass Fittings crafted by a Naval Officer character are no different that Brass Fittings created by a dedicated Freetrader...
...although I was led to believe that Freetraders could create certain structures or items later in the game to set them apart from other classes - though not from one another.
(I am currently not in game - but about to join Aussie server so I will test this more soon)
And because all items are the same the AH is perfectly functional (in that the mechanics work) as it is.
Possibly something FLS should look at?
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
But it makes no difference who the crafter is in PotBS. Brass Fittings crafted by a Naval Officer character are no different that Brass Fittings created by a dedicated Freetrader...
...although I was led to believe that Freetraders could create certain structures or items later in the game to set them apart from other classes - though not from one another.
(I am currently not in game - but about to join Aussie server so I will test this more soon)
And because all items are the same the AH is perfectly functional (in that the mechanics work) as it is.
Possibly something FLS should look at?
Well freetraders can make "advanced" structures, but only for some structures. There is no "advanced" textile mill for example. Right now the advanced structures are for your real base resources, and they provide "some" advantage. I've said elsewhere I don't like naval officers being on an economic equal with freetraders, I think its absurd.
As I mentioned before, my problem on the AH is you have no clue how much of a certain good is available at a certain price. Just add that in. Show how much is available for this distinct price.
As far as advertising, many times it can mean developing an exclusive customer, once they buy from you enough, and see you know how to get the goods out. In other games that were more market orientated, after awhile, I no longer had to "sell on the open market" I had developed so many contacts who bought from me and were impressed with my punctuality, volume, prices, I had exclusive clients lining up to purchase my goods. Seeing who is engaging in dumping or price gouging can also be nice for future records (and no i don't mean gank him lol)
Well, I agree with you and in fact I said so pre-release. I think that FLS can still do something about this in the proposed idea about player governed ports too BTW. ;-)
Absolutely not! That would destroy the whole AH system. There was a blog on this explaining how the system works... I am in transit (I am at an Airport right now) so I can't find this for you but ask at FLS forums for a link.
FWIW I think there were many "bad" design choices in PotBS - but the AH system is not one of those.
It really is WAD (Works As Designed). I'm sorry - but you need to read the blog on this or we need to agree to disagree :-)
I agree with you here. But IIRC you can still do this in PotBS? Player to player trades were in place when I tested?
More work, granted. But isn't that fair?
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
Well, I agree with you and in fact I said so pre-release. I think that FLS can still do something about this in the proposed idea about player governed ports too BTW. ;-)
Absolutely not! That would destroy the whole AH system. There was a blog on this explaining how the system works... I am in transit (I am at an Airport right now) so I can't find this for you but ask at FLS forums for a link.
FWIW I think there were many "bad" design choices in PotBS - but the AH system is not one of those.
It really is WAD (Works As Designed). I'm sorry - but you need to read the blog on this or we need to agree to disagree :-)
I agree with you here. But IIRC you can still do this in PotBS? Player to player trades were in place when I tested?
More work, granted. But isn't that fair?
I'd have to see that link to get a better sense of what you are saying, and can't access the FLS forums at the office (but I can mmorpg.com's, hmmmmm rofl)
Indeed, player trades can happen. Let me give a small example. I was a combat medic and a miner in swg. The goods, being crafted by players, you saw who crafted them. (The stats could also be different, but for the moment, lets leave that out.) After working dilligently to make sure my stuff was always stocked, people began to speak well of my materials, and the rate at which they were available. They would say "You know, I'm a heavy crafter who is in need of a miner to supply me a steady supply of goods. Considering how dedicated you are on the vendor/ah, I'd like to offer you that job.)
I think this would be an economic boom for players. You are a hemp farmer. You grow lots of hemp, and you always make sure you have a lot available. Textile mill makers need hemp. As a result, they buy from you if they are having a huge operation. They see "x is really good at keeping a lot of hemp for sale, he must be able to produce a lot." You send x a tell saying "how'd you like to have a customer always waiting for you. At the rate I buy, for a small discount, you will never have to wait for things to sell on the AH again, and you will make a substantial profit working with me. Heck if business is booming, I'll even cut you in on the profits!"
I can make these kind of deals in society right now. I managed to arrange one by complete chance when I saw a level one freetrader who was not getting much done in the game, and not sure how to make money. With a generous loan from me to get him started on production, I made him a dedicated hemp farmer once he was able to really have the structures i needed. he makes a lot of money selling 500 hemp a day. To me, dropping 5k a day is pocket change. To him, at such a low level, gaining 5k a day for 5 minutes of work is quite a windfall. There needs to be some systems in place that encourage this kind of work not just amongst society members, but members of that nation as a whole.
On a hunch... and with the aid of google...
http://haven.thratchen.com/?m=200706
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
No i say it because you give a game that is half broken a rating of basically 90% which is like an A rating when in actual fact its probably closer to 5 or maybe 6
Right now its a horrible game. It was possibly "average" 7 or 7.5 upon release but since then things have gone haywire. The economy essentially ins't working. Its simple and not particularly complex. The engines are dated. The avatar work is somewhat crude as far as well being customizable we all walk around as clones not much there. Very little of the game is covered so either you haven't seen it or you haven't played it. Most people do comment on the avatara customization being very simple for a new game that is supposed to be on the "A list". That's usualy one of the first comments made.
Classes need a lot of work. The strategy of the game is entirely ruined due to the fact that they decay system has been turned off. So basically contention is in fact broken. The entire game revolves around one singular goal "warfare" and winning a map, but the economy is somewhat broken due to low population which hampers the economic end of warefare and well the contention system which is the red ring system is half turned off removing the strategy of the game. So it hovers at mediorce now down from average because its now broken morso now then when it was released.
I don't see how you can give this game a near perfect rating of 8.5 and say with a little work it will get a 9. It needs a tremendous amount of work. so I can only conclude you haven't taken part in the game or aren't seeing it or are possibly a diehard fan no matter what is done. Cause well I can't see how anyone can't see what is wrong with it at this point it like slaps you in the face when you start playing after a very short time. The trial is more then ample time to disover all this because of the fact the game is not particularly complicated. /shrugs sorry.
Yes I've been in the "end game." Yet I also noted in the same review my bias towards the economic aspects of games that have a free-market economy. I do some PvP. Yet it is not a huge part of my gaming style.I never said the game was "groundbreaking" that's just you inserting words in my mouth. I said that some of the things they did was a refreshing change from the linear world, and I stand by that. Please, when critquing what I said, critque what I said.
Elsewhere I've stated this about the endgame. I think its absolutely absurd that you should be able to hit level 50 in a month. The fact that I criticized the auction house tells me your nothing but someone looking to cause trouble and flame a game he's disenfranchised with. On the one hand, you say the game isn't free market, and then you complain that the AH's are available to almost anyone. Such a wide exposure is typically a precondition of a free market, that cuts out the guild mentality of price fixing and "good ol boy clubs".
As far as societies working together, that in no way guts the chance at a free market. Most socities (at least on my server) do not MANDATE people produce this or that good at this or that price. They ask for suggestions, and ask that when dealing with others in society, the price be lowered. When other people in the society are selling for lower, you drop prices or find yourself out of the market. In other words, that sounds a lot like a free market and supply and demand to me.
If we're rating how WoW and EvE worked in their respective areas, then they would be rated higher (the fact that EvE has had a very large problem with corruption however limits that rating.) I don't like WoW. but I understand that Blizzard set out to do something, and what they set out to do was achieved beyond their expectations.
Without going into details I would like you to point out where did I claim you used the term "groudbreaking"? Rather it was a statement of my opinion and it was aimed against high ratings you awarded to the game on the basis of disputable merit. In short I don't think that broken game system and flawed design make "a good game that has tremendous potential". Currently it is a poor game with decent potential, if it was released a year later it would probably be a good game with tremendous potential.
And yes, you bet I am unhappy with the game, a product I bought and paid for. In my opionion they charged full price for half finished goods. Now the only way I can state my dislike as a customer is by stopping my subscription and proclaiming my objections publicly. If that makes it flaming, I will be happy to continue to flame until that time I see it fit to stop. Judging by patch notes and plans FLS will in next six months implement cosmetic changes or features that should have been in the game at the release, like endgame. For me, at this time and unles something changes, POTBS is worth more dead then alive. The reason is I am not keen on seeing POTBS starting a trend of shoddy games at full price, something that seems to occur quite often with SOE affiliated games (I know it is not owned, thank you).
As for the free market economy, let me break it out in steps. One, the game implemented free market economy and that was not a good idea for RvR based game because it makes economic warfare impossible and it is very unrealistic. Quite simply those who quarrel will never be engaged in full and open trade.
Two, free market principle failed because societies adopted its exact opposite, namely planned economy and it works. Guild pricing and clubs is how it now functions on most servers, current supply and demand created glutted economy with prices under the minimnal production value. Socieities dump their excess goods on AH and smaller manufacturers simply sell at a loss while recuperating the difference by PvE, missions etc.
Three, even if freemarket principle was well implemented and even if it worked it isn't particulary happy solution as the time period we are talking about new nothign abotu free market. I agree this is iffy since game has as much historic accuracy as Jack Sparrow movie.
At any rate I don't plan to argue with you on semantics and details. The reason is, oddly enough, that I agree with majority of things you stated outside your first post.
I never said the game was "groundbreaking" that's just you inserting words in my mouth. I said that some of the things they did was a refreshing change from the linear world, and I stand by that. Please, when critquing what I said, critque what I said.
Elsewhere I've stated this about the endgame. I think its absolutely absurd that you should be able to hit level 50 in a month. The fact that I criticized the auction house tells me your nothing but someone looking to cause trouble and flame a game he's disenfranchised with. On the one hand, you say the game isn't free market, and then you complain that the AH's are available to almost anyone. Such a wide exposure is typically a precondition of a free market, that cuts out the guild mentality of price fixing and "good ol boy clubs".
As far as societies working together, that in no way guts the chance at a free market. Most socities (at least on my server) do not MANDATE people produce this or that good at this or that price. They ask for suggestions, and ask that when dealing with others in society, the price be lowered. When other people in the society are selling for lower, you drop prices or find yourself out of the market. In other words, that sounds a lot like a free market and supply and demand to me.
If we're rating how WoW and EvE worked in their respective areas, then they would be rated higher (the fact that EvE has had a very large problem with corruption however limits that rating.) I don't like WoW. but I understand that Blizzard set out to do something, and what they set out to do was achieved beyond their expectations.
Without going into details I would like you to point out where did I claim you used the term "groudbreaking"? Rather it was a statement of my opinion and it was aimed against high ratings you awarded to the game on the basis of disputable merit. In short I don't think that broken game system and flawed design make "a good game that has tremendous potential". Currently it is a poor game with decent potential, if it was released a year later it would probably be a good game with tremendous potential.
And yes, you bet I am unhappy with the game, a product I bought and paid for. In my opionion they charged full price for half finished goods. Now the only way I can state my dislike as a customer is by stopping my subscription and proclaiming my objections publicly. If that makes it flaming, I will be happy to continue to flame until that time I see it fit to stop. Judging by patch notes and plans FLS will in next six months implement cosmetic changes or features that should have been in the game at the release, like endgame. For me, at this time and unles something changes, POTBS is worth more dead then alive. The reason is I am not keen on seeing POTBS starting a trend of shoddy games at full price, something that seems to occur quite often with SOE affiliated games (I know it is not owned, thank you).
As for the free market economy, let me break it out in steps. One, the game implemented free market economy and that was not a good idea for RvR based game because it makes economic warfare impossible and it is very unrealistic. Quite simply those who quarrel will never be engaged in full and open trade.
Two, free market principle failed because societies adopted its exact opposite, namely planned economy and it works. Guild pricing and clubs is how it now functions on most servers, current supply and demand created glutted economy with prices under the minimnal production value. Socieities dump their excess goods on AH and smaller manufacturers simply sell at a loss while recuperating the difference by PvE, missions etc.
Three, even if freemarket principle was well implemented and even if it worked it isn't particulary happy solution as the time period we are talking about new nothign abotu free market. I agree this is iffy since game has as much historic accuracy as Jack Sparrow movie.
At any rate I don't plan to argue with you on semantics and details. The reason is, oddly enough, that I agree with majority of things you stated outside your first post.
Meh, and I was looking forward to an economic philosophy discussion! LOL jk. Suffice to say, capitalism and the free market did not just pop out of thin air, they had their roots, and those roots were FIRMLY in place in the 1720's, but such is neither here nor there.