Certainly depends how much skill plays a part in this game, but it seems pretty obvious that only the select few that get in early will have huge advantages in the game.
The game is not in alpha nor beta if you pay for it. It is essentially released. Hence restricting accounts to a select few just makes this game a laughing stock if you ask me. Another game that will tank early because of clueless devs.
As much as the feature set looks attractive, this game will be a pass for most of us.
So, the model is EVE, with slow and steady growth over time. IT appears the folks that do want to play EVE are still signing up. Same will happen with Pathfinder Online. The big bonus is you (I mean YOU!) can sign up now and still get in for month 2 of Early Enrollment. the idea is for the EE players to establish some player settlements so when Open Enrollment occurs there will be plenty of options for the new players to choose from. When the map expands many of the current settlement will "stretch their legs" and move to new territory so they can expand. And a player can only advance so far in one class skill set in order to keep the power curve as flat as possible. We shall see how it works out, but the long term plan is pretty solid.
Originally posted by FearU 5 grand for early access and a tavern. Ouch + pass.
There are cars that cost $100,000. Does that mean that since that option exists you will decide not to buy any car at all? The Tavern option is expensive, yes, but over a dozen people have bought it because they want to support the Pathfinder Online project at that level.
You can get into EE month 2 for $100, which comes with a bunch of other things, including a few months pre-paid, after which the subscription is $15/month (or $150/year if you prefer). If you don't want to spend that much, no problem; Open Enrollment begins early in 2016 and only costs $35.
Originally posted by FearU 5 grand for early access and a tavern. Ouch + pass.
There are cars that cost $100,000. Does that mean that since that option exists you will decide not to buy any car at all? The Tavern option is expensive, yes, but over a dozen people have bought it because they want to support the Pathfinder Online project at that level.
You can get into EE month 2 for $100, which comes with a bunch of other things, including a few months pre-paid, after which the subscription is $15/month (or $150/year if you prefer). If you don't want to spend that much, no problem; Open Enrollment begins early in 2016 and only costs $35.
Just looking at these prices just scream scam. It just seems that money gives advantage in this game. Seriously we are looking at a very limited game at this point with no realistic expectation it will ever become much more. Yes I know that MMO's cost money, but throwing money at them like this is no guarantee you will ever get anything back.
There's a huge difference between "design by committee" and "market research". PFO crowdforging is not about design by committee- it's about assessing the priorities of the community so that the real designers can make good, informed decisions.
If the community says "we want to split the world into Felucca and Trammel", GW is just going to ignore them; you don't crowdforge basic design principles. If the community says "we'd rather put off implementing caravan wagons so that we can get trebuchets sooner", that's a completely legitimate subject for a designer to listen to their customers on.
When someone asks me, what I like in a game, it tells me that they have no idea what they want to do... in other words, they don't wish to make a game of their vision, they only wish to sell a game. Those sort of games tend to always end up on the dung heap the quickest because it's all been there done that to death.
Artists cringe at the idea of creating a work for another... they prefer the creative freedom of creating for themselves. If the public buys it great, if not, at least they know they haven't caved on their ideals to make a sale. I think that is what has dried up in MMOs these days... the creativity... they seem to cater to the consumer more and not to their ideals. In other words, if given the choice, they wouldn't play their game for very long either.
I say stop fishing for approval from the masses, sit behind closed doors and just make your game the way you envisioned it. Don't tell us what you plan to do, just do it. When it's ready for release, show it to us like a proud pappa. This is your baby, treat it like you own it. I think games went downhill big time the moment the developers got all touch feely with the masses. I don't know about you, but there has never been an office meeting that I have attended that wasn't ultimately a waste of time. I could have spent that hour doing actual work instead of telling people what I plan to do.
If the game has merit, it will stand on it's own. All these dog and pony shows read like smoke and mirrors and I ask myself, imagine how much they could have been doing if they weren't doing these meetings all the time. Even writing a blog on what is happening is time someone is spending doing something other than what they were hired to do... unless they are purely a PR type. Less talk, more action... and how about trusting your own ideas and see if they fly for once... for once in a great long while.
I backed Pathfinder online through the Kickstarter and have been following the game's development since then. While there are many views on it both positive and negative, the Development Team is not handing the reins of the vision over to the community. No core design is effected through Crowdforging directly but I will say that the Devs have been interacting with the community more than any other game I've seen and while they may not change the designed based on our input, they do listen and are factoring in ours views as they align with the core design goals and pacing of development.
Ideascale is also another tool they are using to gauge the communities interest or lack of interest in planned and community based design and features. With Ideascale even the silent can vote and not say a word.
As for the early adopters having a large advantage over later ones, this will not be the case except in that you will already have a character, know the system, and potentially have some built up resources. When these early adopters have higher level characters it will not be like most MMOs where any new players or low level characters have 0 chance of any effect. Instead you will see 2-4 beginning characters be able to take down a high level character if they work together. The progression curve is much different than in other games I've seen in that regard without detracting from the individuals progression. This lends it much more to a group and social power gauge and new as well as older players will all be valuable.
For those who are interested and want to see how things play out, the $100 buy in for Early Enrollment is worth it. For those that are skeptical and don't want to spend their money on an unknown, they can wait until Open Enrollment and all that the 1 1/2 years of development will lend to the game at that point. It will most definitely be playable and live during EE but for some that isn't enough, for others it will be the most fun to see how it develops and possibly take part in what options are in the game by OE.
I for one am very excited to see how it progresses and Goblinworks have already shown they are doing things others haven't or can't. For a small budget indie Developer, they are moving mountains and have already past a point where other companies have folded and continue to meet expectations of the community.
"Listening to the community" in any way, shape or form, when it comes to game design, is a dreadful mistake, because "the community" doesn't say anything, only squeaky wheels do, and basically they don't know what the fuck they want, and what they vote for with their feet is always going to be different from what they scream and shout about.
EVE didn't get where it is today by listening to its community.
Pretending to listen to the community on design matters, and lying that you're going to implement what they want, while actually doing whatever you're planning to do, is the way to go.
On the other hand, listening to the community when it comes to problems and bugs in the game you've already designed and created, is a very good idea. Regardless of whether someone's a douche or not, and they're talking out of their arse wrt the imagined cause of their bad experience, their bad experience is their bad experience, so something sure the hell is wrong with what you've designed and created; plus, any game audience is going to be largely composed of douches anyway, and you want their money.
One thing I liked about Aion are the surveys that used to popup from time to time as you played the game with a reward at the end for taking the survey. That got everyone involved in changes for the game.
On another note, I hope they start working on controlling bots even now as the current trend seems to be too underestimate them until they get overwhelmed and the community complains. If they want to be innovative anyplace it should be in this area.
I enjoyed the article. :-)
"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
Comments
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
Certainly depends how much skill plays a part in this game, but it seems pretty obvious that only the select few that get in early will have huge advantages in the game.
The game is not in alpha nor beta if you pay for it. It is essentially released. Hence restricting accounts to a select few just makes this game a laughing stock if you ask me. Another game that will tank early because of clueless devs.
As much as the feature set looks attractive, this game will be a pass for most of us.
There are cars that cost $100,000. Does that mean that since that option exists you will decide not to buy any car at all? The Tavern option is expensive, yes, but over a dozen people have bought it because they want to support the Pathfinder Online project at that level.
You can get into EE month 2 for $100, which comes with a bunch of other things, including a few months pre-paid, after which the subscription is $15/month (or $150/year if you prefer). If you don't want to spend that much, no problem; Open Enrollment begins early in 2016 and only costs $35.
Just looking at these prices just scream scam. It just seems that money gives advantage in this game. Seriously we are looking at a very limited game at this point with no realistic expectation it will ever become much more. Yes I know that MMO's cost money, but throwing money at them like this is no guarantee you will ever get anything back.
There's a huge difference between "design by committee" and "market research". PFO crowdforging is not about design by committee- it's about assessing the priorities of the community so that the real designers can make good, informed decisions.
If the community says "we want to split the world into Felucca and Trammel", GW is just going to ignore them; you don't crowdforge basic design principles. If the community says "we'd rather put off implementing caravan wagons so that we can get trebuchets sooner", that's a completely legitimate subject for a designer to listen to their customers on.
When someone asks me, what I like in a game, it tells me that they have no idea what they want to do... in other words, they don't wish to make a game of their vision, they only wish to sell a game. Those sort of games tend to always end up on the dung heap the quickest because it's all been there done that to death.
Artists cringe at the idea of creating a work for another... they prefer the creative freedom of creating for themselves. If the public buys it great, if not, at least they know they haven't caved on their ideals to make a sale. I think that is what has dried up in MMOs these days... the creativity... they seem to cater to the consumer more and not to their ideals. In other words, if given the choice, they wouldn't play their game for very long either.
I say stop fishing for approval from the masses, sit behind closed doors and just make your game the way you envisioned it. Don't tell us what you plan to do, just do it. When it's ready for release, show it to us like a proud pappa. This is your baby, treat it like you own it. I think games went downhill big time the moment the developers got all touch feely with the masses. I don't know about you, but there has never been an office meeting that I have attended that wasn't ultimately a waste of time. I could have spent that hour doing actual work instead of telling people what I plan to do.
If the game has merit, it will stand on it's own. All these dog and pony shows read like smoke and mirrors and I ask myself, imagine how much they could have been doing if they weren't doing these meetings all the time. Even writing a blog on what is happening is time someone is spending doing something other than what they were hired to do... unless they are purely a PR type. Less talk, more action... and how about trusting your own ideas and see if they fly for once... for once in a great long while.
I backed Pathfinder online through the Kickstarter and have been following the game's development since then. While there are many views on it both positive and negative, the Development Team is not handing the reins of the vision over to the community. No core design is effected through Crowdforging directly but I will say that the Devs have been interacting with the community more than any other game I've seen and while they may not change the designed based on our input, they do listen and are factoring in ours views as they align with the core design goals and pacing of development.
Ideascale is also another tool they are using to gauge the communities interest or lack of interest in planned and community based design and features. With Ideascale even the silent can vote and not say a word.
As for the early adopters having a large advantage over later ones, this will not be the case except in that you will already have a character, know the system, and potentially have some built up resources. When these early adopters have higher level characters it will not be like most MMOs where any new players or low level characters have 0 chance of any effect. Instead you will see 2-4 beginning characters be able to take down a high level character if they work together. The progression curve is much different than in other games I've seen in that regard without detracting from the individuals progression. This lends it much more to a group and social power gauge and new as well as older players will all be valuable.
For those who are interested and want to see how things play out, the $100 buy in for Early Enrollment is worth it. For those that are skeptical and don't want to spend their money on an unknown, they can wait until Open Enrollment and all that the 1 1/2 years of development will lend to the game at that point. It will most definitely be playable and live during EE but for some that isn't enough, for others it will be the most fun to see how it develops and possibly take part in what options are in the game by OE.
I for one am very excited to see how it progresses and Goblinworks have already shown they are doing things others haven't or can't. For a small budget indie Developer, they are moving mountains and have already past a point where other companies have folded and continue to meet expectations of the community.
Wexel Daventry
"Listening to the community" in any way, shape or form, when it comes to game design, is a dreadful mistake, because "the community" doesn't say anything, only squeaky wheels do, and basically they don't know what the fuck they want, and what they vote for with their feet is always going to be different from what they scream and shout about.
EVE didn't get where it is today by listening to its community.
Pretending to listen to the community on design matters, and lying that you're going to implement what they want, while actually doing whatever you're planning to do, is the way to go.
On the other hand, listening to the community when it comes to problems and bugs in the game you've already designed and created, is a very good idea. Regardless of whether someone's a douche or not, and they're talking out of their arse wrt the imagined cause of their bad experience, their bad experience is their bad experience, so something sure the hell is wrong with what you've designed and created; plus, any game audience is going to be largely composed of douches anyway, and you want their money.
One thing I liked about Aion are the surveys that used to popup from time to time as you played the game with a reward at the end for taking the survey. That got everyone involved in changes for the game.
On another note, I hope they start working on controlling bots even now as the current trend seems to be too underestimate them until they get overwhelmed and the community complains. If they want to be innovative anyplace it should be in this area.
"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