Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Pathfinder Online: Subscription for early access !?!
UnleadedRev
Member UncommonPosts: 568
It was bad enough, when the gaming world changed to the point that we had to buy a game to play in its BETA, even worse, was doing the same for their Alpha.
And although, I now accept Early Access and Founders Programs to both fund the IPs and games I love in order to have them made "properly" and avoid the chaos taint of big publisher stupid decisions that ruin games and give developers heart burn, I do draw the line at paying a subscription as well. The argument can also be made that bone head decisions and improperly made games still happen way too much, despite early access and founder programs that were created to avoid this.
Again... despite, my support, I do draw the line at paying a subscription as well.
So here is a message for the folks at Pathfinder Online:
1) No matter how much I like Pathfinder the RPG and have high hopes for Pathfinder Online, there is NO WAY I am going to pay $15 a month for Alpha, Early Access, to a incomplete game. In fact, I reject doing so and encourage others to reject that subscription during early access Alpha as well, simply so that NO ONE else considers that for their games.
2) The Pathfinder Online website is horrible both in looks and function
3) The marketing folks at Pathfinder Online or those in charge have no clue on how to promote a game or draw attention to it.
4) Curse of the great IPs...why is it that whenever there is an IP that I love, i.e. Warhammer, Warhammer 40K, Battlelore, and now Pathfinder, these great IPs get the worst people to publish and make them?
Comments
While I might agree, the PFO seems to have promise.
I got a trial key and gave it a go.
Right off the bat I had issues opening and closing the options menu's. I couldn't select ok on quests (you had to find a sweet spot about an inch up from the OK selection on my screen). Little things.
Not saying it wasn't interesting, it just wasn't ready. I'm not seeing 15 bucks for it until they get sorted. But still this could be a gem if they take the time to polish it up and not alienate the community in that time. Most people seemed nice.
Exactly.
There are two ways of looking at this.
You can either believe what a majority of developers have done in the past, by charging players for early access to literally test the game for them, take the money and run, never finishing their game.
OR
You can believe that the developers are decent folks that are truly of the best interest in creating a tight community, and a great game built around that community.
Obviously it is hard to do this and we have seen it a lot in the past 5 years, when a developer abandons their project without notice.
It is hard to gauge who is being honest these days, and who is going to follow through with their promises - and that is the leap of faith some will take, if they share the same passion for the project that these developers do. Either that, or they are just plain stupid, and a sucker for punishment.
At the end of the day, joining an early access game whether it is free to join, or has a cost, it is still your choice. Is it worth investing your time, money, and energy into? Yes? Then go for it! No? Move on!
I remember when I was a kid and the only time I heard of new games is when my mom would drive me to Blockbuster to rent. Gamers are spoiled brats these days anyway - which is a totally separate topic.
Originally posted by Arskaaa
"when players learned tacticks in dungeon/raids, its bread".
How does it affect you negatively?
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
want 7 free days of playing? Try this
http://www.swtor.com/r/ZptVnY
There wont be any wipes.
I wanted to like this game the way I enjoyed Vanguard.
The game lacks production quality. It doesn't feel like you hit anything in combat, it's not fluid at all.
I spent at least an hour trying to figure out what keys do what and binding them to my mouse and keyboard.
Because it shows a big problem of the current market where devs keep trying to sell their unfinished games.
You didn't answer the question.
So how does that affect you negatively?
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Subscriptions........
I have no problem at all with subscriptions....usually.The problem sinks in when we are paying those added multi millions per month and not seeing a fair shake in return.The devs usually take our 1/2/5/10 million a month and eat it or shove it in their bank account.If you have 100k players at 15 a month,that is 1.5 million a month,if it takes 6 months to make a cheap xpack and we know all xpacks look cheap,that is 9 million that somehow got eaten up.MOST of these devs claim they can spend years to make the entire game for that amount,as apparently 9 million is like 30+ million without the added overhead of publishers and investors.Of course bigger developers have far more overhead perhaps they need 1-2 million a month just to pay all the bills,but they are also bringing in 500k+ a month in subs so they are pulling in 5+ million a month.
The end result,the truth is that Indie developers are not just looking to make a living,they are looking to get rich,so if the gamer's put in 150 million,your getting a game that looks like 30 million,you spend 20 million on a xpack it looks like 3-5 million went into it.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I remember those blockbuster days. I also used to get excited going to Blockbuster and seeing what new games that i've never heard were available. My luck though, I would find a great game and someone already rented it lol.
TBH I have no problem with this. I've bought games before where I've gotten into betas or early access, but it's more of a venezuelan thing where for legal reasons (strict foreign currency exchange control b the government) if I don't use a certain amount of foreign currency by a set date I'd have to pay much higher price for it (much higher = 10+ times more). Also I do believe in supporting a game if you have a certain assurance it'll be to your liking.
I wouldn't pay a sub for access to beta, much less alpha, I might pay a box price early if there's a set and near date of release, but if someone feels like they want (and financially can) support a company that way, more power to them... and having been burned by bad releases in the past I'd much rather have companies that are actually being honest by telling people that what they're paying is a beta or alpha status, so they can make an informed choice in the matter, than having games released in beta (or less) status.
What can men do against such reckless hate?
I think you missed the point. He is trying to say we need to say no to this practice so that it doesn't get adopted from other developers/publishers. PFO having a sub while being in alpha isn't going to affect him directly if he doesn't play it. But, the next mmo he is excited about might get the idea that this is acceptable. Which it's not.
I think the OP is right when it comes to subs in the early access or beta or even alpha stages. It should not even be.
They already charge a certain amount for patron status, beta, alpha, now they started to charge for early access. Sure it is fun to play a game and feel part of the development, i agree with that. The thing is people pay those charge at a rate that a full completed game would charge you to get the game once it hits the store and even at higher prices but in this case it is not finish. Again it is fun and i do it from time to time ( pay a patron status or early access fee).
The thing here is the fact that now they know there is cash whales that do it with almost anything that comes out, it is a trend now and they will now try to even sell monthly subs to milk even more?. If you encourage this practice then for sure all devs, publishers, etc. will do it. It started the same way for the beta access, then it went to alpha stage and even extended to early access. They started at 50$ or 100$ now it can go up to thousands.
So how does this affects us or me personally well i can answer this by stating that i am not rich, i don't care if you are or others are. But i don't want to be viewed by devs or publishers only as a cash whale. I want them to give me ( The customer ) a product that is top notch for the cash i pay and not the type of crap we keep getting this last few years, because of cash whales that keeps thinking they are intitle to everything because they have cash or don't know how to spend there cash properly.
It is time to let them know that it could be ok to charge a small fee for alpha, beta or early access but subs is NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.
It is not PFO itself it is the trend it will make.
Because when I have a look at potential games to buy I will have to check first which of these are actual games and which are half finished messes.
It's easy to read reports with grading systems about regular games - MMOs are too complex for a quick grading like that.
So when the list of available games is filling up with unfinished stuff, it obviously does affect me as a player.
If that doesn't set off warning bell alarms in your mind about the game, I don't know what will.
You say people "need" to say no to this. Why? How does this affect you negatively?
Even if it happens in that next MMO, how would that affect you negatively?
There are products I don't care to buy, but I don't actively campaign to remove those products from the market. Firstly it would be stupid, and second it would be almost impossible, and thirdly products removed from sale due to public opinion is nearly always an unnecessary tragedy (ie Buckyballs.)
Only products with a clear, strong negative impact on society should be controlled (and even then it deserves a good long cool-headed discussion.)
The product we're discussing doesn't have a clear strong negative impact for society. It doesn't even have a negative impact at all for the people buying it. It gives them early access to a videogame. The worst possible thing that can happen is that they burn themselves out on an unfinished game and miss out on the longer fun they might've had if they started with the finished game instead.
Can we be reasonable about this?
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
From a business point of view, I dont understand why they are trying to market the game in its current condition. The only reason I can come up with is they dont have enough money to finish the game using their current resources. Marketing a poor quality build to players now is not only useless, it drives away potential customers. Many people will try it now, hate it and never give it another look, even two years down the road assuming it does get released in a quality state by then. Why drive those customers away now? Why keep sending people to game forums to give out keys?
The only person I see being unreasonable is you, good sir. We're talking about video games, and you're playing psychologist. If you want to discuss "clear strong negative impact on society", I'm sure there are more engaging forums out there that may be reasonable enough for you to hold a wonderful discussion. MMORPG.com isn't that place.
How does it affect me negatively? Maybe I would like to try out a game in an alpha or beta state but wont be able to in another few years as this practice catches on in the industry. Maybe it makes me angry that we used to have up-front pricing and you knew what it was going to cost to play a game but now the game industry wants a box fee, a monthly sub just to test the game and a cash shop. I dont know how much to budget for gaming anymore as the costs to play continue to rise. Maybe it makes me angry when game developers try and lie by placing a new name on something old. A short alpha followed by an "Early Access Release" is the same thing as paying for beta or alpha access. The company does not want to admit this hence the new name.
You said "There are products I don't care to buy, but I don't actively campaign to remove those products from the market." But that is not the same thing that is happening here. If we just didnt like the product then yes, you would have a point but its the fact that the CEO is using marketing speak to justify charging people to test his game. This trend is growing in the gaming industry, Sergi Titov tried it in War-Z calling it a "foundation release" to justify releasing his game full of bugs.
Its not the product, its the business model and it does have a negative impact on society. What if this practice catches on and the next time you buy a new car they add in an extra $1000 to the price for "testing fee"? What if you order a hamburger and they serve it to you rare and when you try and return it, they say they are in a testing phase and you should just keep it and pay for the privilege of being allowed to test it. You might say these examples are silly but the whole point in your argument is we should not protest anything unless it has a "clear strong negative impact for society". How can anything on this forum fit that bill? You could go to any forum on this site and whatever they are discussing would not have a "clear strong negative impact for society".
Personally, if the CEO just came out and said, we plan to charge a sub fee while we test the game since we dont have enough money to finish the game otherwise, I would be happy. Its the lie, the calling a square peg "round" that bothers me. Dont we have enough dishonestly in marketing/advertising without allowing a new level to be added?
Theres only two answers, one you already stated.
I'm fairly certain that the games offering early access simply need money to continue development. Some of them are worth it, others are more like Pathfinder. I'm not against the practice, because sometimes the games are really fun, even though they aren't finished.
The second possibility is that the company producing this game is really self-diluted and thinks that Pathfinder is a good game in its current state, and doesn't actually understand how badly a poor launch can effect a game's success and lifespan. I hope this isn't the real reason.
OK, if you've got money to throw around, then sure, pay for a beta game. I think it's better just to wait and see if a game actually takes off. If it's going to be a good game it's still going to be good after it's launched, so no hurry is needed. And why anyone would actually pay for a beta key or beta sub is beyond me.
Sure at the business meeting for the game someone said, "Sure, lets have a subscription for alpha, if it works, it means more money for the company. If it doesn't then at least we gave it a shot." Of course if it works more games are going to do it also. Including games that will never come out of alpha.
But watching Twitch, I see some gamers do have a lot of money to throw around. Paying to follow someone and giving them nice size donations on top of that.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey