Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
What did PotBS do wrong?
Wolfenpride
Member, Newbie CommonPosts: 3,988
Im curious in people opinions on why this game didn't really take off?
I see alot of negativity directed towards the game as well, why is that?
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The combat is boring, and it is way over instanced.
|Mortal Online|Gnostaria|
Ship combat is not boring, at least it was not to me. Boarding(AV combat) plain sucked IMO.
To me they went wrong when they got away from their plans to make a great ship combat game and started to add the rest.
If they had just spent the time adding very good missions,and made the ship combat (PVE) part of the game better i think it would have done better.
Trying to be a game that is good to everyone most often is a mistake, again IMO:) Need to focus on something and make it great then slowly add to that.
Nothing against the game nor the Devs, they always seemed to be very nice and really cared. Just the MMO market is not what it was back when they started out on the project.
i think the biggest 2 pieces are this:
missions aren't that exciting.
and missing exploration.
i really think if they had added the ability to dock the ship and actually wonder around and explore really would of added it.
people are sailing around and everything kind of has that already present there for you.
nothing to captivate you.
if you could of gotten off on an island thats dark and mysterious and wonder around with your crew i think it would of really helped.
playing sea dogs (pirates of the carribbean on xbox) kept me for as long as it did for that reason. when i got bored of sea and sailing i could get off on an island and wander around and explore it.
They didn't listen to there beta testers!
They made a game about pirates. Eveyone knows Ninjas are far superior.
Psh, pirates get wenches. when's the last time you saw a ninja with a bunch of chicks hanging off his arm?
It was ok. Nothing spectacular though. Ship combat was interesting at first but ultimately became very routine. Boarding and avatar combat seemed somehow off although I'm not sure how to phrase that better. You were almost forced to join a society in order to survive and if you didn't like PVP, the game after level 32-ish sorta blew. Hunting really just didn't net cash so if you ran out of missions on your main and still needed cash, the easiest way to get more was to play an alt and have someone transfer it over.
The game had a bit of a rough start -- there were some technical issues as launch that had not appeared during beta (still not sure why they made the change right at launch time) that caused the game to slow to unplayable speeds depending on the type of router you had. A lot of people who didn't have the ability to switch out their routers or upgrade their firmware (for example, people on college dorm networks) were S.O.L. The "solution" was to forward the appropriate port's traffic to the IP of your PC. This worked great unless you were married and your wife was trying to play at the same time on her PC and you were faced with a dilemma of forwarding the traffic to her PC or sleeping on the couch.
Port contention battles were a great idea but became more of a pain in the ass than fun if you had decided you didn't like the PotBS version of PvP (several folks in my society just weren't interested). And, like in all PvP games, there was always a few folks that just lurked in the open PvP zones waiting for someone who had a mission turn-in at a city in the zone to come through...
It was fun initially but unless you were very PvP oriented, it became very routine quickly.
For the type of game and open PvP they should have made this a skill based combat / character system rather than the old run of the mill level based grind fest it is.
Almost immediately after the game launched the devs started listening to the wrong people: the gankers and griefers. Quotes like "No crying in the red circle" and "make the war unfair in your favor" started being thrown around as responses to complaints about griefing and regular players started fleeing the game. When the population dropped the griefers got pissed because they no longer had anybody to pick on and they started leaving the game.
If you read the official PoTBS forums you will see the crux of the problem, the same dozen or so elitists spouting off about the red zone , ganking is fair live with it ETC. Most new comers reading this jargon have took their money elsewhere.
Most people have it covered.
Instanced everything? Lazy game design (but easy to program) and very bad for "immersion" in the game world. Get to a battle 2 seconds too late? None for you. Your friends/guildmates get to die, and you can't help. Stupid. Should have allowed members grouped with you to load into the battle when they arrived, at a minimum. But no.
Bad PR was part of it. "No crying in the red circle." Too Bad. Bet the devs wish they could have that quote back. Don't want to listen to your testers/customers? Fine. "No crying over red ink."
Avatar combat was/is terrible. Economy was/is non-functional. Bad PvE, heavy loss for death (which pissed people off more when they got ganked), no exploration, boring. repetitive everything, the list goes on.
FLS didn't do themselves any favors by picking SOE to be their publisher either. The initial release/distribution was botched by SOE, and SOE's terrible reputation certainly kept some people from playing this title. How great is the deal they made you, now?
This game had its shot, blew it, and now gets to join the other not-quite-dead titles on SOE station pass.
The marketplace is unforgiving in that way. Make a bad game? Get punished. It is that simple.
Immersion.
See here http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/post/2174190#2174190
Same issue.
Instancing has its purpose - but basing a whole game around it is not the way to go. Everything else Burnvet said is true too.
Oh - and the Travelmap. It made the world too small and caused more problems than it solved IMHO.
Edit: And the Fanbois. Both FLS listening to them and the fact that the Fanbois effectively shut down any constructive debate pre-release. Many of the issues that subsequently went on to cause serious issues (some that still are) were known and players (including myself) attempted to bring them to FLS attention.
"The Devs know best." was the cry. "This thread should be locked.", "...dead horse..." and "...go back to WoW..."
Well Fanbois - I hope you are proud of your efforts. What game are you all playing now BTW?
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
There is one point which will never be stressed enough: The developers not only embraced the "No crying in the red circle" gospel, but they also spread it, which in the end caused more problems than the "hardcore" ever could have created on their own.
And let us not forget those prophetic words by PotBS lead designer Isildur, six months before release: "The people who want to gank are waiting for the Next Big Failure to come along, to let them grief noobs for a few months before it shrivels up and dies. This is because every sane developer has learned this lesson: griefing and ganking doesn’t just lose you the $15/mo from the person who was griefed. It has a multiplicative effect, creating an environment in your game, and a reputation outside your game, and people tend to steer clear. ‘Play to Crush’ as a selling point and marketing slogan probably lost SB twice the players it ended up bringing them.”
You might say that Isildur answered this, although very obliquely, in his "Ambush Gameplay" devlog entry. But that was in late May, while that quote became common knowledge in late March. Two months, therefore, without the least comment from Isildur on this question, while events seemed to confirm that his original statement was correct.
The game must have gone through quite a u-turn for the final result to not only facilitate ganking (what could be better than six-ship grouping?) but to see the developers advocate it openly on the forums, the most notorious instance of which being DrewC's "Open Sea PvP is a very low restriction PvP system. Characters can be attacked by virtually anyone, and they can most certainly be ganked. That’s the nature of the system, and we’re not changing that system. So we don’t want to hear any crying about it. War’s not fair. Open Sea PvP is war. Open Sea PvP is not fair. I recommend trying to figure out how to make it not fair in your favor."
Anyway, that's all old news now, and let's hope FLS will have the chance to learn from it. They dropped "no crying in the red circle" very quickly (early June or so, right after Isildur's devlog), but it left scars upon the game. As for the "hardcore", they seem to have divided into two categories: the first group, which jumped ship when Age of Conan came out, or when the Warhammer beta started, sometimes proclaiming the game was now dying (see The Mafia: oppose changes, then when changes are in, game dying despite their seeing no problem with it just before, all the while dropping glowing words about Warhammer that could be mistaken for ad copy) as a result of the change in Vision (as if they wouldn't do their usual pattern and jump ship for the next new thing anyway); and the second group, more loyal to the game though just as much to blame, which is still hanging on but always talking of leaving (who could not be touched by Jack Simple's seventh or so farewell thread?), and which can now be seen falling into nostalgia over the glorious time they had in beta (Garbad the Weak).
Who could ask for anything more?
I think Open (Sea) PvP is a viable game feature, and I believe you have already covered of how it could be made in such a way. For those not familiar, Open PvP can be done, even at unfair odds, but if and only if, the group that is at the disadvantage has the means to escape. Turn sail and run.
However, the use of instances for fights and lack of escape defeats the true purpose of low restriction or unregulated Open PvP. If narrowing it down to as few items as possible, I think the over use of Instances was the crucial factor in this regards.
And that is why...
Conservatives' pessimism is conducive to their happiness in three ways. First, they are rarely surprised -- they are right more often than not about the course of events. Second, when they are wrong they are happy to be so. Third, because pessimistic conservatives put not their faith in princes -- government -- they accept that happiness is a function of fending for oneself. They believe that happiness is an activity -- it is inseparable from the pursuit of happiness.
Which really makes me question the designers.
Seen this? http://www.burningsea.com/forums/showthread.php?t=38413
Read what he says:
[quote=kazamx@FLS Boards]... "MMO PLAYERS ARE JERKS!"
That should be the number 1 thought in the mind of every developer and content person in the company. When they create something the first thing they should work out is how will people try to grief the weakest using this mechanic. There is NOTHING that MMO players wont do to grief someone else, I repeat NOTHING.
...whenever someone in the office claims a player wont do that, throw the nearest thing at them and make them stand in the corner.
I think FLSs biggest problem is they think MMO players play to compete and have fun, WRONG! Players are here to win and griefing is the easiest way to win. They want the best gear to show off to their buddies. They want people to know them. Playing an MMO is ALL about the Epeen.[/quote]
What? You only just realized this?
Some of us attempted to remind everyone of this 'maxim' in the Beta stage!
Yes. MMO players ARE jerks. In fact, most anyone who war games is a 'jerk'. We play to win.
Yet in the Beta stage many of the Fanbois shouted this down too - promoting some idea that some 'code of honor' would somehow be followed and the game would WAD (Work As Designed) as a result???
In games players will use every possible tactic they can to win. If the rules are unclear they will claim the rules mean what they want them to mean. If the game contains exploits or bugs they will be used to the max and the players will claim that they thought the Developer intended it should be used that way.
Players behaved exactly as I expected.
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
I am the person who coined the "no crying in the red circle" phrase during beta. True story. Other beta testers might remember me.
It was in a rant post in a thread where someone wanted GMs to put all kinds of "intent" rules onto PvP.
The Forum Manager "Danicia" put the line in her sig with my name on it the next day, and suddenly it was sprouting up in everyone's sigs and became a slogan. It also became misinterpreted.
My point was that an unlimited PvP game must have exactly that. Where FLS failed was in designing a game that made unlimited PvP fun and worthwhile. People are correct when they say that the system was poorly designed, punitive, a PvE grindfest, instanced all to hell, etc.
But... the problem is NOT in the idea of unlimited PvP. The problem was in watering down the vision and releasing a very unready, shallow game.
This is it in my opinion. Combat was agonizingly slow. Being part of a group didn't help. Movement was so slow there was no helping a weaker groupmate. Avatar combat was horrible. The Economy was a bust.
Blackhorse Faction
I must admit, I'm quite curious. I know you were the creator of that quote, but I was completely unaware of the context in which it was created. If you could provide a link to that original thread, it would be very much appreciated.
Also, you seem to have posted little to nothing after the beta period. Did you continue to play after release? If so, for how long, and if not, why? After all, it would seem you have given birth to something completely different from what you first intended. The saddest thing then is how the devs grabbed it and ran away with it.
I must admit, I'm quite curious. I know you were the creator of that quote, but I was completely unaware of the context in which it was created. If you could provide a link to that original thread, it would be very much appreciated.
Also, you seem to have posted little to nothing after the beta period. Did you continue to play after release? If so, for how long, and if not, why? After all, it would seem you have given birth to something completely different from what you first intended. The saddest thing then is how the devs grabbed it and ran away with it.
The post was on the beta forums, which I believe were wiped out when beta ended. The OP wanted to put a lot of GM-interpretation-of-intent and such into PvP. My point was that the ruleset had to be black and white, and if the red circles meant you were fair game, then you were fair game. Reward had to have risk, etc. If you have grey area in your rules (such as GMs deciding case-by-case what is "fair" and what isn't) then you really have no rules.
And no, I didn't buy the game. I really WANTED to like the game, but it was far too rough, rushed, incomplete, and took far too many directions I didn't like.
I didn't like having to grind PvE for hours to make a red circle. I didn't like the fact that small ships were all but obsolete in level 50 combat (and became moreso). I didn't like that they removed reefs and all consideration of water depth from combat. I didn't like that there were basically two types of quests you did over and over and over.
I didn't like the quasi-magical, highly unrealistic "skills" (including voodoo, but I don't know if they ever finished that - it was so sketchy at the end of beta that there was nothing but a bit of placeholder code for it) that made combat more about your ship and skill build than your skill as a player.
Also, I and many others tried to warn them that the way they were structuring the economy would lead to guilds going entirely internal to build and trade, and that the AH's would be empty, which is exactly what happened.
Edit: Oh, and I also knew from being in beta that the end game was barely anything more than theory. Other than a handful of port battles there was really NOTHING to do. Then you had to grind PvE to get enough "points" to get a good shot at a lottery ticket to get into the port battle. Then you had to hope it happened at a time of day you could make. Then you had to hope the sides were both full and somewhat close to even. Then you had to deal with the fact that the port battles themselves were in what I would call an alpha state. The interface barely existed, there were (I think) only two port battle maps, and a variety of bugs.
Edit 2: Heh... I just went to their forums to search, just in case the beta forums were still around somewhere. My username still shows up in the search list, but no posts exist by me, so it looks like the beta forums were definitely wiped or archived somewhere out of reach.
PotBS beta forums:
http://archive.burningsea.com/forums/index.php
Have fun.
EDIT: While we're posting links, if anyone has the links to the post-release forum threads in the server sections for servers now closed (Morgan, Kidd, Guadeloupe, etc.), that would be much appreciated. But I fear that these, unlike the beta forums, might have been deleted altogether -- I just can't find them. Only those for still-extant servers seem to remain.
3 Reasons...
#1: WAY too much instancing....there's no game world, nothing to explore.
#2: Avatar Comcat is a joke
#3: NO content....Nothing to do at max level but repetitive kill missions and gank style PvP
-------------------------
Pretty sure this is it:
-----
Do you know the name of the 50? What a whining pansy. Camping lowbies then crying when they strike back. What a shameless, whining pansy that level 50 is.
The level 50 in question is 100% wrong. He was gaming the system to get his jollies, and you gave it right back to him. Well done.
Engaging someone to harrass, distract, etc., with no intention of actually fighting them, is COMPLETELY valid. ANY reason you want to engage is valid. What if you engage then change your mind? What if you engage and then have to leave? What if a million things.
They made an instanced PvP/battle system, and they are going to have to live with it.
If I get one single whiff of GMs/Devs starting to apply subjective arbitration to PvP "intent" in this game -- if the devs are going to start telling us that they will gauge "intent" in engaging someone as potential "grief" then you can say goodbye to PvP in this game, and you can say goodbye to me and many others.
THERE IS NO CRYING IN THE RED CIRCLE.
-----
archive.burningsea.com/forums/showthread.php
Ha! Yep, that's it. I told you it was a bit of a rant. ;p
I remember the topic now. Some level 50 had been petitioning a lowbie for harassment due to the lowbie's basically using the system to thwart the level 50 (engaging to pull him into an instance, then running away, if I recall) who was camping a newbie port which had fallen into a red circle
I never thought red circles should be over newbie areas, btw. I like open PvP, but you have to let people into the game first. I also didn't like that you could be camped and engaged before you got control of your character. Session-change ganking is the lowest excuse for PvP in any game.
Anyway, there is it - the birth of the infamous "red circle" phrase. You're welcome! LOL...
Thanks for looking it up and saving me the trouble. Ironic that I first used to it attack a level 50 ganker who was crying over his prey fighting back, eh?
Very interesting, all of this. Perhaps you are aware of the tactic now known as "speedboat griefing", which involves something slightly similar to this (except that in this case it is usually done by a level 50 using one of the faster ships to stop enemy vessels from leaving the instance). One of the perils of having a world so reliant on instancing.
On another note, I was reading Joe Ludwig's blog. Ludwig, as some of you might know, was the producer of Pirates of the Burning Sea and left Flying Lab Software in July after 9 years there. On July 28, he wrote a blog entry (of which I just became aware) explaining his reasons for moving on.
He barely touches on Pirates of the Burning Sea, except to say that "we made plenty of mistakes on Pirates that still haunt the game". I don't want to read too much into this, but it doesn't exactly sound optimistic to me.
If you would like to check back (FLS Beta Archive) I proposed this as a tactic in an argument with a couple of Fanbois about 3-6 months before release. I called it a "chaser".
Point being that we did predict these tactics but whomever (Fanbois / FLS) thought we were wrong.
Joe is gone too? I missed that.
Interestingly, I was looking at Isildur's Blog a couple of days ago. He doesn't seem to mention PotBS much any more.
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.