As a Pathfinder pen and paper player and a general fan of Paizo and their high quality output, this announcement can only be a good thing - especially the nods that their nascent site makes towards building kingdoms in an adaptive sandbox environment. If done right, this could be a great MMO in a player driven environment.
On the other hand, there have been many great MMO design documents out there, none of which that I have seen survive the struggles of technical issues, investor jitters, and impatient release schedules that prioritise ROI. This goes double for ambitious designs that promise much ( Horizons ? Dark and Light ? ) . I'm sure everyone has at least one ( if not multiple ) MMO they can think of that they were hyped to see, yet disappointed to play. I really hope the pathfinder team hit the right notes and I wish them the best of luck - but I wonder if the initial premise is too ambitious - particularly for a brand new outfit that has absolutely zero track record with MMOs or indeed video game development. Sure they can hire experience or have experienced people at the helm, but as a new organisation theres no familiar path for them to tread, every problem will be a new problem to tackle for the outfit - a decision that needs to be made.
Arguably MMOs are the most difficult genre of game to bring to market. Risks and rewards are much larger than any other kind of game. This will be Paizo's (under the shared VIP guidance of Lisa Stevens) first foray into video games - and for its first attempt it will try its hand at the crown jewel - an ambitious MMO.
I dont doubt that Paizo will be able to leverage their high quality content into such a game, which should be a real breath of fresh air in the tired fed-ex quest arena, but the rest of it, technical, design, delivery, is a big gamble I think.
Whilst a less ambitious opener would be less exciting, it may have been more prudent. Walk before you can run.
In any case, its very early days, and things are subject to change, so who knows what will eventually hit the table. But one to watch I think.
Some cool information, definitely a project worth paying attention to until we receive more news. As much as I love sandboxes, I'm rather skeptic that anyone trying to recreate an oldschool experience can actually do it justice (if that's what they intend to do), and what worries me the most is mention of a hybrid subscription, F2P payment model. None the less, thanks for the post.
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
We are planning a hybrid subscription/free-to-play model. Players will have the option to pay a flat monthly fee for complete access to all standard game features, or to play for free with certain restrictions, using microtransactions to access desired features and content on an a la carte basis. Pricing details have not yet been finalized.
Will there be premium content?
Yes. Several types of premium content can be purchased using microtransactions. This content includes "bling"—visual enhancements to the character or the character's property that have no mechanical effect; a wide variety of mounts that let you customize your ride and show your personal sense of style; and adventure content packaged like classic adventure modules that you and your friends will be able to play through as a group.
And there is the deal-breaker for me. I learned my lesson with LotRO after F2P. Paying a sub and then having to pay more for the nice stuff just sucks. They will add neat cosmetics, neat mounts, neat other things, and people will have to pay more for them. No thanks. I'll stay in my run of the mill P2P theme-park where I my sub gets me the fluff and extras.
I would be happy to see another sandbox, but not under those conditions. This is the same reason TSW is off my list as well.
I'd say hold off judgement on the business model until you see it. Based on the description there, it sounds like you would have never bought a DnD campaign after buying the starter set, as that's pretty much what they're saying there.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
We are planning a hybrid subscription/free-to-play model. Players will have the option to pay a flat monthly fee for complete access to all standard game features, or to play for free with certain restrictions, using microtransactions to access desired features and content on an a la carte basis. Pricing details have not yet been finalized.
Will there be premium content?
Yes. Several types of premium content can be purchased using microtransactions. This content includes "bling"—visual enhancements to the character or the character's property that have no mechanical effect; a wide variety of mounts that let you customize your ride and show your personal sense of style; and adventure content packaged like classic adventure modules that you and your friends will be able to play through as a group.
And there is the deal-breaker for me. I learned my lesson with LotRO after F2P. Paying a sub and then having to pay more for the nice stuff just sucks. They will add neat cosmetics, neat mounts, neat other things, and people will have to pay more for them. No thanks. I'll stay in my run of the mill P2P theme-park where I my sub gets me the fluff and extras.
I would be happy to see another sandbox, but not under those conditions. This is the same reason TSW is off my list as well.
I'd say hold off judgement on the business model until you see it. Based on the description there, it sounds like you would have never bought a DnD campaign after buying the starter set, as that's pretty much what they're saying there.
This is one thing I hate about WoW and Blizzard and any comapny that does this. if we pay a premium price to subscribe, we should have access to everything the game has to offer - even if we have to quest for it - our premium accounts should allow us access to everything.
We are planning a hybrid subscription/free-to-play model. Players will have the option to pay a flat monthly fee for complete access to all standard game features, or to play for free with certain restrictions, using microtransactions to access desired features and content on an a la carte basis. Pricing details have not yet been finalized.
Will there be premium content?
Yes. Several types of premium content can be purchased using microtransactions. This content includes "bling"—visual enhancements to the character or the character's property that have no mechanical effect; a wide variety of mounts that let you customize your ride and show your personal sense of style; and adventure content packaged like classic adventure modules that you and your friends will be able to play through as a group.
And there is the deal-breaker for me. I learned my lesson with LotRO after F2P. Paying a sub and then having to pay more for the nice stuff just sucks. They will add neat cosmetics, neat mounts, neat other things, and people will have to pay more for them. No thanks. I'll stay in my run of the mill P2P theme-park where I my sub gets me the fluff and extras.
I would be happy to see another sandbox, but not under those conditions. This is the same reason TSW is off my list as well.
I'd say hold off judgement on the business model until you see it. Based on the description there, it sounds like you would have never bought a DnD campaign after buying the starter set, as that's pretty much what they're saying there.
This is one thing I hate about WoW and Blizzard and any comapny that does this. if we pay a premium price to subscribe, we should have access to everything the game has to offer - even if we have to quest for it - our premium accounts should allow us access to everything.
Hear, hear!
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
When new games are planning F2P out the gate to me its a sign that they know they can't really compete with the big boys because they have a lack of funds/talent.
However at least they arent delusional like MO/Earthrise which will result in a complete crash and burn.
We are planning a hybrid subscription/free-to-play model. Players will have the option to pay a flat monthly fee for complete access to all standard game features, or to play for free with certain restrictions, using microtransactions to access desired features and content on an a la carte basis. Pricing details have not yet been finalized.
Will there be premium content?
Yes. Several types of premium content can be purchased using microtransactions. This content includes "bling"—visual enhancements to the character or the character's property that have no mechanical effect; a wide variety of mounts that let you customize your ride and show your personal sense of style; and adventure content packaged like classic adventure modules that you and your friends will be able to play through as a group.
And there is the deal-breaker for me. I learned my lesson with LotRO after F2P. Paying a sub and then having to pay more for the nice stuff just sucks. They will add neat cosmetics, neat mounts, neat other things, and people will have to pay more for them. No thanks. I'll stay in my run of the mill P2P theme-park where I my sub gets me the fluff and extras.
I would be happy to see another sandbox, but not under those conditions. This is the same reason TSW is off my list as well.
I'd say hold off judgement on the business model until you see it. Based on the description there, it sounds like you would have never bought a DnD campaign after buying the starter set, as that's pretty much what they're saying there.
This is one thing I hate about WoW and Blizzard and any comapny that does this. if we pay a premium price to subscribe, we should have access to everything the game has to offer - even if we have to quest for it - our premium accounts should allow us access to everything.
Wrong.
EQ gave us plenty of new content with each expansion, and expecting it to be included with the normal sub is just plain silly. Sure it is nice if a company throws mini expansions out there during the year, but the mojo updates are worthy of investing more money.
I only stuck it out 5 years, but some folks have been there for all 18 expansions now. If you want a game to survive, then you support it. Otherwise dont complain about the trivial updates each year.
Asking Devs to make AAA sandbox titles is like trying to get fine dining on a McDonalds dollar menu budget.
reading from FAQ, it won't be direct translation of D20 rules. expect "spirit and flavor of the Pathfinder". it won't use OGL. it won't use classes nor levels. uses "innovative archetype" system. wide variety of skills to develop over time, which unlocks class-like abilities.
how will it develop, remains to be seen.
*Sigh* I just lost a bit of the hype...
I don't mind MMOs with no levels or classes but they could focus on translating a P&P game that doesn't have them either then, like Runequest or ARS Magica.
Well, I like the potential of the design more, as DDO is very instanced and not as open as this in theory....Have to wait to see more, I tried DDO, didn't really like it much...I would rather play this game, if they did it right...
Hard to argue something that is only on paper and no one has seen it or how they will do it, it could never happen, or totally suck...
Come on, it's asking for investors. I predict that it will never be released or remain in beta forever.
The MMO development company just formed...why would they not be looking for investors? That's uh - how it's done.
That's how it's done... by devs with no money. And you can't make a game with no money, and no reasonable investor would shell out $100,000 to a company with nothing to show. There are hundreds of games like this out there: devs with big dreams and no money asking for inestors to give them thousands of dollars on their word alone. No games ever result from these projects; at best, an endless beta results with about a hundrd people (mostly the devs and their friends) playing the game. Look at the good MMOs out there. Were any of them made this way?
Obviously, this game may have a bit more of an edge, being headed by someone with past experience in MMOs. But otherwise, this game and company nothing going for it than the hundreds of other never finished. Heck, these devs haven't even started: "...when Goblinworks commences operations in 2012."
Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm sure not getting my hopes up until this looks more like a game by a real company than a glorified project by some has-beens and hobbyists.
Come on, it's asking for investors. I predict that it will never be released or remain in beta forever.
The MMO development company just formed...why would they not be looking for investors? That's uh - how it's done.
That's how it's done... by devs with no money. And you can't make a game with no money, and no reasonable investor would shell out $100,000 to a company with nothing to show. There are hundreds of games like this out there: devs with big dreams and no money asking for inestors to give them thousands of dollars on their word alone. No games ever result from these projects; at best, an endless beta results with about a hundrd people (mostly the devs and their friends) playing the game. Look at the good MMOs out there. Were any of them made this way?
Obviously, this game may have a bit more of an edge, being headed by someone with past experience in MMOs. But otherwise, this game and company nothing going for it than the hundreds of other never finished. Heck, these devs haven't even started: "...when Goblinworks commences operations in 2012."
Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm sure not getting my hopes up until this looks more like a game by a real company than a glorified project by some has-beens and hobbyists.
The folks at Paizo are not exactly a random group picked up off the street with no clue about how things are done though.
Generally speaking, devs with little to no money is how all of the companies started out... pick a big company today, go back and look at how they started...tada.
With your attitude, there would be no big game companies today - because they would have never started.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Comments
Don't want to get my hopes up lol.
As a Pathfinder pen and paper player and a general fan of Paizo and their high quality output, this announcement can only be a good thing - especially the nods that their nascent site makes towards building kingdoms in an adaptive sandbox environment. If done right, this could be a great MMO in a player driven environment.
On the other hand, there have been many great MMO design documents out there, none of which that I have seen survive the struggles of technical issues, investor jitters, and impatient release schedules that prioritise ROI. This goes double for ambitious designs that promise much ( Horizons ? Dark and Light ? ) . I'm sure everyone has at least one ( if not multiple ) MMO they can think of that they were hyped to see, yet disappointed to play. I really hope the pathfinder team hit the right notes and I wish them the best of luck - but I wonder if the initial premise is too ambitious - particularly for a brand new outfit that has absolutely zero track record with MMOs or indeed video game development. Sure they can hire experience or have experienced people at the helm, but as a new organisation theres no familiar path for them to tread, every problem will be a new problem to tackle for the outfit - a decision that needs to be made.
Arguably MMOs are the most difficult genre of game to bring to market. Risks and rewards are much larger than any other kind of game. This will be Paizo's (under the shared VIP guidance of Lisa Stevens) first foray into video games - and for its first attempt it will try its hand at the crown jewel - an ambitious MMO.
I dont doubt that Paizo will be able to leverage their high quality content into such a game, which should be a real breath of fresh air in the tired fed-ex quest arena, but the rest of it, technical, design, delivery, is a big gamble I think.
Whilst a less ambitious opener would be less exciting, it may have been more prudent. Walk before you can run.
In any case, its very early days, and things are subject to change, so who knows what will eventually hit the table. But one to watch I think.
Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.
Some cool information, definitely a project worth paying attention to until we receive more news. As much as I love sandboxes, I'm rather skeptic that anyone trying to recreate an oldschool experience can actually do it justice (if that's what they intend to do), and what worries me the most is mention of a hybrid subscription, F2P payment model. None the less, thanks for the post.
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
To bad the end of the world is next year so imo picka mmo now and play not much time left!!
I'd say hold off judgement on the business model until you see it. Based on the description there, it sounds like you would have never bought a DnD campaign after buying the starter set, as that's pretty much what they're saying there.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
This is one thing I hate about WoW and Blizzard and any comapny that does this. if we pay a premium price to subscribe, we should have access to everything the game has to offer - even if we have to quest for it - our premium accounts should allow us access to everything.
In before "This isn't a true Sandbox game" arguments.
Did I make it?
Hear, hear!
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
When new games are planning F2P out the gate to me its a sign that they know they can't really compete with the big boys because they have a lack of funds/talent.
However at least they arent delusional like MO/Earthrise which will result in a complete crash and burn.
Remember Old School Ultima Online
Wrong.
EQ gave us plenty of new content with each expansion, and expecting it to be included with the normal sub is just plain silly. Sure it is nice if a company throws mini expansions out there during the year, but the mojo updates are worthy of investing more money.
I only stuck it out 5 years, but some folks have been there for all 18 expansions now. If you want a game to survive, then you support it. Otherwise dont complain about the trivial updates each year.
Asking Devs to make AAA sandbox titles is like trying to get fine dining on a McDonalds dollar menu budget.
There is already D&D Online.
Why would this new MMO be better than DDO ?
Yep, same here
Well, I like the potential of the design more, as DDO is very instanced and not as open as this in theory....Have to wait to see more, I tried DDO, didn't really like it much...I would rather play this game, if they did it right...
Hard to argue something that is only on paper and no one has seen it or how they will do it, it could never happen, or totally suck...
Come on, it's asking for investors. I predict that it will never be released or remain in beta forever.
The MMO development company just formed...why would they not be looking for investors? That's uh - how it's done.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
That's how it's done... by devs with no money. And you can't make a game with no money, and no reasonable investor would shell out $100,000 to a company with nothing to show. There are hundreds of games like this out there: devs with big dreams and no money asking for inestors to give them thousands of dollars on their word alone. No games ever result from these projects; at best, an endless beta results with about a hundrd people (mostly the devs and their friends) playing the game. Look at the good MMOs out there. Were any of them made this way?
Obviously, this game may have a bit more of an edge, being headed by someone with past experience in MMOs. But otherwise, this game and company nothing going for it than the hundreds of other never finished. Heck, these devs haven't even started: "...when Goblinworks commences operations in 2012."
Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm sure not getting my hopes up until this looks more like a game by a real company than a glorified project by some has-beens and hobbyists.
I hope they are working on a single player game as well, there's one huge void in the market just gagging to be filled by D&D wholesomeness!
The folks at Paizo are not exactly a random group picked up off the street with no clue about how things are done though.
Generally speaking, devs with little to no money is how all of the companies started out... pick a big company today, go back and look at how they started...tada.
With your attitude, there would be no big game companies today - because they would have never started.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
Inb4 hasbro sues them into oblivion.
There IS a reason why no one (that isn't based out of china) wants to touch the D&D license with a 3 meter pole at this point.
Cue another three or four years of hype for us to follow. Wonderful.
Because DDO is as far as you can get from actual D&D.....
About this topic I just want to say: "Finally a small developer that maybe has a chance of making a game that isn't a dumbed down cookie-cutter MMO."
Buy Neverwinter Nights 1 here! | Unofficial NWN1 homepage | NWN1 guild on X-Fire
About all the PvP comments I just want to say that D&D characters are not SUPPOSED to be balanced 1vs1.
That is part of the beauty of the game and that is why we team up with others when going adventuring....
Buy Neverwinter Nights 1 here! | Unofficial NWN1 homepage | NWN1 guild on X-Fire
Many folks never experienced the symbiotic nature of gaming though...
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
Players nowadays just can't understand this.
An honest review of SW:TOR 6/10 (Danny Wojcicki)