I do, however, hope that any such review would also look at the progress the game has been making, and the pace of that progress, and give them a few points for it.
Reviews should ALWAYS be base don exactly what is in the game at the time of review. Not what was missing 3 months before. Not what is promised 3 months later. Again this is not PFO specific and anyone who cares can find my prior statements saying the same thing about other games.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
I have 49 posts, all about PFO, because I actively avoided MMOs until Pathfinder came along, and I like it, and I like where I think they are going with it. Very little on mmorpg is anything but opinion, and in my opinion, PFO is going to be an awesome game if it survives. I tried EVE, and didn't like it, so I don't talk about it and I don't go to forums about it and trash it with angry messages. I tried LOTRO and didn't like it, so I don't talk about it and I don't go to forums about it and trash it with angry messages.
There's way more negative personal blogs about me than three, and I'm not even the CEO of an MMO design company.
Referring to your first paragraph, you might not have gone to those forums when you didnt like those games but you did the exact opposite when you came here and posted 49 times about how great PO is. Why is it ok for you to post strongly in favor of a game but whine when others post negatively?
The second paragraph is a bit disturbing. Either you are still in high school or you lack social skills. Could you point me to 5 of the blogs that post negatively about you so I can determine which one it is for myself? Thank you.
"Sean (Murray) saying MP will be in the game is not remotely close to evidence that at the point of purchase people thought there was MP in the game." - SEANMCAD
You're not looking for a review... you're looking for a publicized bashing...
These forums alone prove that there is nothing that MMORPG.com could say that hasn't already been said by the users already. Reviews are utterly pointless when players can play the game before release. Really, who actually goes by game reviews anymore? It's so 2000.
You're not looking for a review... you're looking for a publicized bashing...
These forums alone prove that there is nothing that MMORPG.com could say that hasn't already been said by the users already. Reviews are utterly pointless when players can play the game before release. Really, who actually goes by game reviews anymore? It's so 2000.
I think people are not so much looking for a bashing than for the CEO to get the payback he deserves for his questionable practises.
I have 49 posts, all about PFO, because I actively avoided MMOs until Pathfinder came along, and I like it, and I like where I think they are going with it. Very little on mmorpg is anything but opinion, and in my opinion, PFO is going to be an awesome game if it survives. I tried EVE, and didn't like it, so I don't talk about it and I don't go to forums about it and trash it with angry messages. I tried LOTRO and didn't like it, so I don't talk about it and I don't go to forums about it and trash it with angry messages.
Lots of people won't like PFO, whether it's finished or not. They're allowed to not like it. Lots of others do like it, and are willing to pay right now for some combination of the play and helping it get to where they hope it will go. Stuff is visibly happening for my money. It does not fit any reasonable definition of a scam, and repeatedly asserting that it is does not make it so. Three personal blogs that make assertions about someone's character, or don't like the level of rewards offered in a kickstarter is not sufficient evidence of "scaminess" to withstand scrutiny. There's way more negative personal blogs about me than three, and I'm not even the CEO of an MMO design company.
It's two personal blogs where the articles in question deal with actual, factual statements or actions made by Ryan Dancey himself, and one very official news site (ICv2), actually.
Had you bothered to even read the posted content, you'd be aware of that. The ICv2 article is also the most important of the three and ICv2's content is respected throughout the industries it covers. They are used as a resource by some of the top businesses worldwide, as well as popular press, including:
* New York Times
* Wall Street Journal
* Fortune
* Business Week
* Time
* USA Today
* Publishers Weekly
ICv2 has existed for nearly 15 years and has a reputation for being both reliable and accurate. If you'd rather continue on with your head buried in the sand, be my guest. A sucker is born every minute, they say.
It absolutely does fit a reasonable definition of a scam in this industry, but with your utter lack of knowledge (in regards to this industry, which you have little to no experience with, by your own admission) I'm not surprised that you can't make that determination.
You don't do this and you don't do that. Good for you, sir! However, you're not me, and if I want to inform individuals about practices I consider to be both dishonest and bad for the gaming industry as a whole - I will certainly do just that!
If all you took from the Challenge Rating 25 article was that someone was unhappy with kickstarter rewards then I really don't know what to say. Actually I do, allow me to highlight a few of the more relevant bits:
"Six months ago, Paizo hired Ryan Dancey, brains behind the OGL,who had just left his position as Chief Marketing Officer of CCP (developers of EVE Online) coincidentally around the same time CCP had a marketing debacle so bad the CEO had to apologise to their customers."
"Ryan Dancey is connected enough in the industry to have hard numbers and facts to back up his suppositions.Of course, since all of this information is confidential, he never shares any of it. He just makes broad statements about the industry based on his insider’s perspective. This is really annoying, as it’s impossible to refute what he says because he hides his sources."
"Later, we have Ryan Dancey joining GAMA in order to revitalize the industry and its trade organization. Until he resigned for hacking into their email accounts. So, not only is he full of great ideas for the industry, but he’s full of integrity as well."
I haven't repeatedly asserted anything, sir, and had you done your homework rather than just making assumptions you would be aware of that fact.
You're not looking for a review... you're looking for a publicized bashing...
These forums alone prove that there is nothing that MMORPG.com could say that hasn't already been said by the users already. Reviews are utterly pointless when players can play the game before release. Really, who actually goes by game reviews anymore? It's so 2000.
A publicized bashing? Are you serious?
MMORPG.com doesn't deal in the business of publicly bashing companies or individuals, perhaps you should stop making assumptions and actually produce some facts.
Who actually goes by game reviews anymore? About 95% of the industry, that's who.
If they gave it a 10 out of 10, then they gave it a 10 out of 10. The review would be accepted as it stood , why wouldn't it be? do you think we have some kind of influence on what the staff write here? You're really reaching.
I think it's bad for any of us to spend a lot of time complaining about things we don't like that aren't hurting us.
This...
I have not played the game, I dont know the devs or anything about it. What I do know is that game development follows a set path, prototype, alpha, beta and then release. Each year we continue to see people in the game industry try and change the name of one or more steps and use that to justify charging money for a poor quality product. I have read the posts on the official forum from backers who agree this game in its current state is lacking and feels like it is in an alpha or beta state. This hurts the gaming industry hence, it hurts all of us gamers. How many gamers didnt buy or play Day-Z or Rust because they got burnt when Sergey Titov called his testing phase for War-Z a "Foundation Release"? How many gamers will stop playing MMO's or backing Kickstarter projects over what is being done in PO?
Asking for support from backers and accepting donations is great and allowing the supporters the option to pay while testing is also ok. But once you play with words and try to justify charging a full price sub fee for what many current players are calling an alpha-state game is just wrong and not a trend that many of us want to see catch on in the game industry.
"Sean (Murray) saying MP will be in the game is not remotely close to evidence that at the point of purchase people thought there was MP in the game." - SEANMCAD
I have not played the game, I dont know the devs or anything about it. What I do know is that game development follows a set path, prototype, alpha, beta and then release. Each year we continue to see people in the game industry try and change the name of one or more steps and use that to justify charging money for a poor quality product. I have read the posts on the official forum from backers who agree this game in its current state is lacking and feels like it is in an alpha or beta state. This hurts the gaming industry hence, it hurts all of us gamers.
But it doesn't follow a set path, or we wouldn't be having this conversation. And there's no reason that the variety should hurt the industry.
No-one is being forced to pay anything. Kickstarter backers are not required to use up their time yet. Many of them are saving it for later. Nobody has to pay to try it right now, they are giving away two-week-free accounts to anyone who asks.
The only people putting money down are people who want to do it. How is that hurting the industry?
You just don't get it, do you?
A percentage of individuals who are putting money down on it, are doing so based on false statements and purposefully misleading information that Dancey is spreading. He utilizes these methods to convince these individuals that the game is worth spending cash on.
It's the equivalent of a used car salesman claiming that a vehicle is brand new in order to make a sale. Then when the owner gets home and realizes he was duped, he is fucked. That money is already spent.
It's this type of purposefully misleading bullshit that hurts the industry, because the more it continues on certain people see it as a way to take advantage of gamers.
What part of this is so difficult for you to grasp?
EDIT: You know what, don't even bother responding. I've decided to block you, you clearly are a huge fanboy of the game and are unwilling to see things in a reasonable light. I don't have the time to argue with someone who couldn't be convinced of the error of his ways, no matter how convincing that argument may be.
I think it's bad for any of us to spend a lot of time complaining about things we don't like that aren't hurting us.
This...
I have not played the game, I dont know the devs or anything about it. What I do know is that game development follows a set path, prototype, alpha, beta and then release. Each year we continue to see people in the game industry try and change the name of one or more steps and use that to justify charging money for a poor quality product. I have read the posts on the official forum from backers who agree this game in its current state is lacking and feels like it is in an alpha or beta state. This hurts the gaming industry hence, it hurts all of us gamers. How many gamers didnt buy or play Day-Z or Rust because they got burnt when Sergey Titov called his testing phase for War-Z a "Foundation Release"? How many gamers will stop playing MMO's or backing Kickstarter projects over what is being done in PO?
Asking for support from backers and accepting donations is great and allowing the supporters the option to pay while testing is also ok. But once you play with words and try to justify charging a full price sub fee for what many current players are calling an alpha-state game is just wrong and not a trend that many of us want to see catch on in the game industry.
Everything else aside, as I have never played PFO and probably won't, the "set path," thing is pretty silly. If I am developing a game, I can follow an path I damn well choose. If I want to charge people money to play in a barebones game and call it a full release, that is entirely my choice and my companies reputation will either prosper or suffer because of it. Trying to lay blame at the feet of the developers is simply trying to divorce any personal accountability players who have purchased the game have.
If you exist in the year 2015 and play games, you know by now that Early Access is a gamble. If you decide to take that plunge, especially when there is a monthly sub on top of that, you can't really blame the developer for your inability to recognize the obvious.
Also, while it could have been changed for all I know because I don't think Id ever been to the site, this page makes no mention whatsoever of the game being in an alpha or beta state. It simply says "early access," and "headstart," so the claim that they are calling the game an alpha and charging for it is false, and if they aren't claiming it's an alpha then no one else is any position whatsoever to tell them it is in an alpha state. Alpha-like, sure. Incomplete and shitty, ok. There is no real scandal here.
And yes, people are just trying to get MMORPG.com to review a mostly unfinished product in order to hopefully get a bad review to "punish," the devs. Has nothing to do with wether or not its in alpha/beta/release. I agree the game should be reviewed, but lets not try to hide our goals here because that doesn't make us any better than them, if they are in fact lying (which I see no proof of).
Also, a review of any kind will just generate publicity, so I am pretty sure the devs won't view this as any kind of "punishment," as people here seem to think they will.
Please visit my youtube channel for some H1Z1/DayZ casual roleplay videos!
You're not looking for a review... you're looking for a publicized bashing...
These forums alone prove that there is nothing that MMORPG.com could say that hasn't already been said by the users already. Reviews are utterly pointless when players can play the game before release. Really, who actually goes by game reviews anymore? It's so 2000.
I for one would like to see a review on the game. As far as I know you can't play this game without spending money so a review might be a good indication on if the game would be worth a try or not. I don't need a review to tell me what I do or do not enjoy playing but I do find reviews useful sometimes to make a determination on if it's even worth the cost to try. So far all I know about Pathfinder is that there is a lot of drama around the developer and his choice of monetization which isn't the least bit surprising these days. I won't call MMORPG impartial by any means but their biases towards certain game styles is a lot more in the open than your average forum poster so it's a lot easier to take into account.
From what I can tell both of the requirements for MMORPG to review this game have been met. The game is charging players to play it and there will no more wipes so there is no reason for MMORPG not to review this game at this point unless they don't feel a review is worth the time and energy given the market interest. That's ultimately their call to make.
This is a review I'm looking forward to. After all, one of the tropes of game reviews is that you never see a bad one, yes? This one will be a delicate dance no matter what MMORPG thinks of it.
But it doesn't follow a set path, or we wouldn't be having this conversation. And there's no reason that the variety should hurt the industry.
No-one is being forced to pay anything. Kickstarter backers are not required to use up their time yet. Many of them are saving it for later. Nobody has to pay to try it right now, they are giving away two-week-free accounts to anyone who asks.
The only people putting money down are people who want to do it. How is that hurting the industry?
It does follow a set path, you are currently in "alpha/beta testing" but you simply call it "Early Enrollment". You can change the name but you are testing a product that is not yet released and wont be for some time. Its the same thing every other MMO does but they dont charge for it.
Your justification of "no body has to do it" doesnt hold water. No body has to smoke crack but we both agree it is bad. Video games could all start charging $50 for monthly access and no body HAS to pay that, we could simply choose not to play. Is that what we want to see happen in the industry? What about Steam charging for mods? No body HAS to make mods for games but the majority of the gaming community voiced their opinion and that practice was revoked until they can rework it to be better.
PO says thanks for backing us, but you want to play in the alpha/beta phase like any other kickstarter mmo would? Sure thing, but you have to start paying a monthly fee. Show me three other MMO's that have had successful kickstarters that did NOT allow their backers to play for free until release. This is an alarming practice and will hurt future kickstarter MMOs if we stand by and do nothing.
I dont understand what you supporters are afraid of. MMORPG has a history of incredibly favorable reviews. Heck, they even gave Mortal Online a 6.2 and that game has been out for 4 years, is F2P and has managed to convince less than 3000 people worldwide that it is worth a $15 a month fee. I would be surprised if PO doesnt get at least a 6.0 in its current state. Will that prove anything? NOPE
The point I am happy with is that MMORPG by doing a review is declaring to the public that fancy terms like "Early Enrollment" and "Foundation Release" are just marketing speak and developers are not fooling anyone by trying to justify charging money for alpha/beta testers.
"Sean (Murray) saying MP will be in the game is not remotely close to evidence that at the point of purchase people thought there was MP in the game." - SEANMCAD
I think it's bad for any of us to spend a lot of time complaining about things we don't like that aren't hurting us.
This...
I have not played the game, I dont know the devs or anything about it. What I do know is that game development follows a set path, prototype, alpha, beta and then release. Each year we continue to see people in the game industry try and change the name of one or more steps and use that to justify charging money for a poor quality product. I have read the posts on the official forum from backers who agree this game in its current state is lacking and feels like it is in an alpha or beta state. This hurts the gaming industry hence, it hurts all of us gamers. How many gamers didnt buy or play Day-Z or Rust because they got burnt when Sergey Titov called his testing phase for War-Z a "Foundation Release"? How many gamers will stop playing MMO's or backing Kickstarter projects over what is being done in PO?
Asking for support from backers and accepting donations is great and allowing the supporters the option to pay while testing is also ok. But once you play with words and try to justify charging a full price sub fee for what many current players are calling an alpha-state game is just wrong and not a trend that many of us want to see catch on in the game industry.
Everything else aside, as I have never played PFO and probably won't, the "set path," thing is pretty silly. If I am developing a game, I can follow an path I damn well choose. If I want to charge people money to play in a barebones game and call it a full release, that is entirely my choice and my companies reputation will either prosper or suffer because of it. Trying to lay blame at the feet of the developers is simply trying to divorce any personal accountability players who have purchased the game have.
If you exist in the year 2015 and play games, you know by now that Early Access is a gamble. If you decide to take that plunge, especially when there is a monthly sub on top of that, you can't really blame the developer for your inability to recognize the obvious.
Also, while it could have been changed for all I know because I don't think Id ever been to the site, this page makes no mention whatsoever of the game being in an alpha or beta state. It simply says "early access," and "headstart," so the claim that they are calling the game an alpha and charging for it is false, and if they aren't claiming it's an alpha then no one else is any position whatsoever to tell them it is in an alpha state. Alpha-like, sure. Incomplete and shitty, ok. There is no real scandal here.
And yes, people are just trying to get MMORPG.com to review a mostly unfinished product in order to hopefully get a bad review to "punish," the devs. Has nothing to do with wether or not its in alpha/beta/release. I agree the game should be reviewed, but lets not try to hide our goals here because that doesn't make us any better than them, if they are in fact lying (which I see no proof of).
Also, a review of any kind will just generate publicity, so I am pretty sure the devs won't view this as any kind of "punishment," as people here seem to think they will.
very good post. From my pov some ppl GAMBLED and won (CAldeathe) and some ppl gambled and lost. the scam feeling unfortunaly is subjetive in this case.
Originally posted by adam_nox I don't see why wipes would affect the ability to review a game. It's traditional to end wiping sometime before release or at release, but that doesn't need to be the case.
I agree, wipes should not matter. Any game that takes money through subs or cash shops should be judged as released.
He didn't say the review would be a public bashing, he said that's what you're looking for. And I happen to think there's some truth in the assertion. There's an apparent anger in you about this game that makes it seem likely you've been in some way personally hurt by either PFO or Dancey, and you appear (from the outside) to be pursuing a personal vendetta.
I doubt anyone posting in this thread has any personal problem with PFO or Dancey. In my case I am a sandbox mmo player, I play Darkfall, Mortal Online, and Eve online so in the case of PFO it's my style of niche game, and I'm very use to buggy games. The problem is that sandbox games are always made by indie devs, and I don't want this cash-grab pay a sub for alpha nonsense to be the industry standard. If Mortal Online, Darkfall, or Eve Online had this pay for alpha system that PFO has I would never have played any of them. I hope that in the future the next sandbox game doesn't try to emulate the shady practices that the CEO of Pathfinder has been attempting.
Comments
These people you're talking of are not very smart. No offense but blaming this site for their actions is even dumber.
Reviews should ALWAYS be base don exactly what is in the game at the time of review. Not what was missing 3 months before. Not what is promised 3 months later. Again this is not PFO specific and anyone who cares can find my prior statements saying the same thing about other games.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Referring to your first paragraph, you might not have gone to those forums when you didnt like those games but you did the exact opposite when you came here and posted 49 times about how great PO is. Why is it ok for you to post strongly in favor of a game but whine when others post negatively?
The second paragraph is a bit disturbing. Either you are still in high school or you lack social skills. Could you point me to 5 of the blogs that post negatively about you so I can determine which one it is for myself? Thank you.
What if they gave it a 10 out of 10?
You're not looking for a review... you're looking for a publicized bashing...
These forums alone prove that there is nothing that MMORPG.com could say that hasn't already been said by the users already. Reviews are utterly pointless when players can play the game before release. Really, who actually goes by game reviews anymore? It's so 2000.
I think people are not so much looking for a bashing than for the CEO to get the payback he deserves for his questionable practises.
It's two personal blogs where the articles in question deal with actual, factual statements or actions made by Ryan Dancey himself, and one very official news site (ICv2), actually.
Had you bothered to even read the posted content, you'd be aware of that. The ICv2 article is also the most important of the three and ICv2's content is respected throughout the industries it covers. They are used as a resource by some of the top businesses worldwide, as well as popular press, including:
* New York Times
* Wall Street Journal
* Fortune
* Business Week
* Time
* USA Today
* Publishers Weekly
ICv2 has existed for nearly 15 years and has a reputation for being both reliable and accurate. If you'd rather continue on with your head buried in the sand, be my guest. A sucker is born every minute, they say.
It absolutely does fit a reasonable definition of a scam in this industry, but with your utter lack of knowledge (in regards to this industry, which you have little to no experience with, by your own admission) I'm not surprised that you can't make that determination.
You don't do this and you don't do that. Good for you, sir! However, you're not me, and if I want to inform individuals about practices I consider to be both dishonest and bad for the gaming industry as a whole - I will certainly do just that!
If all you took from the Challenge Rating 25 article was that someone was unhappy with kickstarter rewards then I really don't know what to say. Actually I do, allow me to highlight a few of the more relevant bits:
"Six months ago, Paizo hired Ryan Dancey, brains behind the OGL, who had just left his position as Chief Marketing Officer of CCP (developers of EVE Online) coincidentally around the same time CCP had a marketing debacle so bad the CEO had to apologise to their customers."
"Ryan Dancey is connected enough in the industry to have hard numbers and facts to back up his suppositions. Of course, since all of this information is confidential, he never shares any of it. He just makes broad statements about the industry based on his insider’s perspective. This is really annoying, as it’s impossible to refute what he says because he hides his sources."
"Later, we have Ryan Dancey joining GAMA in order to revitalize the industry and its trade organization. Until he resigned for hacking into their email accounts. So, not only is he full of great ideas for the industry, but he’s full of integrity as well."
I haven't repeatedly asserted anything, sir, and had you done your homework rather than just making assumptions you would be aware of that fact.
A publicized bashing? Are you serious?
MMORPG.com doesn't deal in the business of publicly bashing companies or individuals, perhaps you should stop making assumptions and actually produce some facts.
Who actually goes by game reviews anymore? About 95% of the industry, that's who.
If they gave it a 10 out of 10, then they gave it a 10 out of 10. The review would be accepted as it stood , why wouldn't it be? do you think we have some kind of influence on what the staff write here? You're really reaching.
This...
I have not played the game, I dont know the devs or anything about it. What I do know is that game development follows a set path, prototype, alpha, beta and then release. Each year we continue to see people in the game industry try and change the name of one or more steps and use that to justify charging money for a poor quality product. I have read the posts on the official forum from backers who agree this game in its current state is lacking and feels like it is in an alpha or beta state. This hurts the gaming industry hence, it hurts all of us gamers. How many gamers didnt buy or play Day-Z or Rust because they got burnt when Sergey Titov called his testing phase for War-Z a "Foundation Release"? How many gamers will stop playing MMO's or backing Kickstarter projects over what is being done in PO?
Asking for support from backers and accepting donations is great and allowing the supporters the option to pay while testing is also ok. But once you play with words and try to justify charging a full price sub fee for what many current players are calling an alpha-state game is just wrong and not a trend that many of us want to see catch on in the game industry.
You just don't get it, do you?
A percentage of individuals who are putting money down on it, are doing so based on false statements and purposefully misleading information that Dancey is spreading. He utilizes these methods to convince these individuals that the game is worth spending cash on.
It's the equivalent of a used car salesman claiming that a vehicle is brand new in order to make a sale. Then when the owner gets home and realizes he was duped, he is fucked. That money is already spent.
It's this type of purposefully misleading bullshit that hurts the industry, because the more it continues on certain people see it as a way to take advantage of gamers.
What part of this is so difficult for you to grasp?
EDIT: You know what, don't even bother responding. I've decided to block you, you clearly are a huge fanboy of the game and are unwilling to see things in a reasonable light. I don't have the time to argue with someone who couldn't be convinced of the error of his ways, no matter how convincing that argument may be.
Good day sir.
Everything else aside, as I have never played PFO and probably won't, the "set path," thing is pretty silly. If I am developing a game, I can follow an path I damn well choose. If I want to charge people money to play in a barebones game and call it a full release, that is entirely my choice and my companies reputation will either prosper or suffer because of it. Trying to lay blame at the feet of the developers is simply trying to divorce any personal accountability players who have purchased the game have.
If you exist in the year 2015 and play games, you know by now that Early Access is a gamble. If you decide to take that plunge, especially when there is a monthly sub on top of that, you can't really blame the developer for your inability to recognize the obvious.
Also, while it could have been changed for all I know because I don't think Id ever been to the site, this page makes no mention whatsoever of the game being in an alpha or beta state. It simply says "early access," and "headstart," so the claim that they are calling the game an alpha and charging for it is false, and if they aren't claiming it's an alpha then no one else is any position whatsoever to tell them it is in an alpha state. Alpha-like, sure. Incomplete and shitty, ok. There is no real scandal here.
And yes, people are just trying to get MMORPG.com to review a mostly unfinished product in order to hopefully get a bad review to "punish," the devs. Has nothing to do with wether or not its in alpha/beta/release. I agree the game should be reviewed, but lets not try to hide our goals here because that doesn't make us any better than them, if they are in fact lying (which I see no proof of).
Also, a review of any kind will just generate publicity, so I am pretty sure the devs won't view this as any kind of "punishment," as people here seem to think they will.
Please visit my youtube channel for some H1Z1/DayZ casual roleplay videos!
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrQoK5VZlwBBzpsksmXtjMQ
I for one would like to see a review on the game. As far as I know you can't play this game without spending money so a review might be a good indication on if the game would be worth a try or not. I don't need a review to tell me what I do or do not enjoy playing but I do find reviews useful sometimes to make a determination on if it's even worth the cost to try. So far all I know about Pathfinder is that there is a lot of drama around the developer and his choice of monetization which isn't the least bit surprising these days. I won't call MMORPG impartial by any means but their biases towards certain game styles is a lot more in the open than your average forum poster so it's a lot easier to take into account.
From what I can tell both of the requirements for MMORPG to review this game have been met. The game is charging players to play it and there will no more wipes so there is no reason for MMORPG not to review this game at this point unless they don't feel a review is worth the time and energy given the market interest. That's ultimately their call to make.
Avatars are people too
It does follow a set path, you are currently in "alpha/beta testing" but you simply call it "Early Enrollment". You can change the name but you are testing a product that is not yet released and wont be for some time. Its the same thing every other MMO does but they dont charge for it.
Your justification of "no body has to do it" doesnt hold water. No body has to smoke crack but we both agree it is bad. Video games could all start charging $50 for monthly access and no body HAS to pay that, we could simply choose not to play. Is that what we want to see happen in the industry? What about Steam charging for mods? No body HAS to make mods for games but the majority of the gaming community voiced their opinion and that practice was revoked until they can rework it to be better.
PO says thanks for backing us, but you want to play in the alpha/beta phase like any other kickstarter mmo would? Sure thing, but you have to start paying a monthly fee. Show me three other MMO's that have had successful kickstarters that did NOT allow their backers to play for free until release. This is an alarming practice and will hurt future kickstarter MMOs if we stand by and do nothing.
I dont understand what you supporters are afraid of. MMORPG has a history of incredibly favorable reviews. Heck, they even gave Mortal Online a 6.2 and that game has been out for 4 years, is F2P and has managed to convince less than 3000 people worldwide that it is worth a $15 a month fee. I would be surprised if PO doesnt get at least a 6.0 in its current state. Will that prove anything? NOPE
The point I am happy with is that MMORPG by doing a review is declaring to the public that fancy terms like "Early Enrollment" and "Foundation Release" are just marketing speak and developers are not fooling anyone by trying to justify charging money for alpha/beta testers.
very good post. From my pov some ppl GAMBLED and won (CAldeathe) and some ppl gambled and lost. the scam feeling unfortunaly is subjetive in this case.
I agree, wipes should not matter. Any game that takes money through subs or cash shops should be judged as released.
I doubt anyone posting in this thread has any personal problem with PFO or Dancey. In my case I am a sandbox mmo player, I play Darkfall, Mortal Online, and Eve online so in the case of PFO it's my style of niche game, and I'm very use to buggy games. The problem is that sandbox games are always made by indie devs, and I don't want this cash-grab pay a sub for alpha nonsense to be the industry standard. If Mortal Online, Darkfall, or Eve Online had this pay for alpha system that PFO has I would never have played any of them. I hope that in the future the next sandbox game doesn't try to emulate the shady practices that the CEO of Pathfinder has been attempting.