I actually found the depth to parts of Pathfinder intriguing. Classes, crafting and so forth. However, I think its asinine that they are trying to charge a retail price AND a full retail subscription fee ($15) to play a game in an alpha state.
Look, I'd pay the $50 if it was free until launch. I'd even pay maybe $5 a month at this point just to contribute. However, I found it nothing short of insulting to hear that they were trying to get me to pay for both a box fee and subscription for an unfinished product, in an alpha state no less.
I asked him in the other thread why he thinks a alpha test sub model was a good business choice when even big named titles are failing with it. He insisted the game is not in a testing period because they are calling it "open enrollment" and there will be no wipes from here on out.
Terrible idea. You have to convince me to put up $50 or whatever just to BUY your game still in alpha, but to force $15 per month out of me for it as well. To test it for you? Seriously? Maybe if it looked more like a modern MMO, but it looks pretty dated too. Sorry, but I think this was a bad business decision.
Yeah, it's nuts to charge a sub for game in this state. From reading on their forums, it seems that a lot of the current players are holding on not because of what the game currently offers, but because of the potential they see in it. You aren't going to attract, or at least maintain, sub-paying players based on potential alone. People are going to play for a bit, get disillusioned, and quit. It's not like this game is on KS in a concept-only phase, where people's hopes will spring eternal. They're going to play and get bitter.
My opinion. Maybe the active and potential player base for this game is a special snowflake.
Lol thank you OP for bringing this thread to my attention. I haven't laughed this hard since the last hiveleader video. Reading all the post including the CEO's with the echo of "I need more money" in the back of my head made this a great thing to read. The guy wants players to help him recruit for this paid w/e it is like its the second coming in video games. Do players get some kind of finder's fee if they get someone to join? The idea behind the game seems decent enough but this a pretty sad tactic for the CEO to try and use in order to get more backers. Just my opinion.
Wait--your big "gotcha" is that the CEO of an indie developer is...marketing what they developed? Are you mental?
"Hey everyone check it out I caught the advertising people advertising things! Oh, oh also I just found out that people who run businesses try and make them successful oh what a super genius I am, I am caught them all! I am the Pokey-boy of catching teh game evil peeples!!!"
You should probably re-read the entire thread, rather than just cherry picking a single statement and twisting it to fit your definition of what was said.
Every single post you've ever made on this forum is in relation to PFO. You're obviously a huge fan, which also makes you hugely biased. Try taking off the rose colored glasses, you'll see things more clearly that way.
I asked him in the other thread why he thinks a alpha test sub model was a good business choice when even big named titles are failing with it. He insisted the game is not in a testing period because they are calling it "open enrollment" and there will be no wipes from here on out.
Terrible idea. You have to convince me to put up $50 or whatever just to BUY your game still in alpha, but to force $15 per month out of me for it as well. To test it for you? Seriously? Maybe if it looked more like a modern MMO, but it looks pretty dated too. Sorry, but I think this was a bad business decision.
I wrote a five paragraph response to him when he posted the other thread awhile back about answering questions. It was exceptionally well written and did not contain anything that would violate the rules of the forum.
He reported me for it when he realized that answering some of my questions would paint him and the game in a negative light, and the moderators here actually deleted my response and then warned me for flaming.
I'm the first to admit that I'm extremely outspoken and often very blunt, sometimes to the point of being a prick. However, that particular situation was absolutely ridiculous. I wasn't doing anything I shouldn't have been, far from it actually.
I still don't understand why it was deleted. The only real explanation is that the staff on this site catered to him because of his position as a CEO, and my previous posting history (which is absolutely questionable at times, and deserving of a warning or worse) was taken into account when they reviewed the report.
If they were to remove the monthly subscription, I wouldn't mind playing and streaming. I just don't think it's worth it to have a sub for alpha. Buy to play is enough.
First of all, the CEO of the game did not blame us, he simply encouraged word of mouth promotion and told us how to do it if we wanted to. They gave us trial keys and told us where we could offer them on sites like this one. They want to grow the game like EVE did and this is one of those methods. From that which actually happened to being :"guilted like jewish children", well wow, OP has got some issues he needs to address, good luck with that. We weren't blamed for anything, that's absurd, I have no idea where OP would get that impression. There was no crime here.
Secondly, Early Enrollment is akin to a paid Beta with no XP rollbacks, that is true. Stop saying it's alpha, it's definitely not alpha, it's a functional game with lots of working features that hundreds of people are enjoying. They have been honest about its current state and those who want to pay for it do, big deal. They are adding BIG chunks monthly, there is absolutely zero indication development for the game is halting or slowing down in any way.
Thirdly, I don't actually expect PFO to have too many people playing throughout the paid Beta and I doubt Ryan Dancey does either. With 5,000 paying accounts they probably pay their salaries for the entirety of 1.5 year Beta and for an inidie company that is golden. I've built two projects with similar pay as you go models so I get what he's doing. They don't even need to break even, the goal is just not be too far in the red during development. Again, not a crime, the risks of large scale development is exactly what keeps Hollywood and major gaming in major ruts constantly.
Lastly, I know I am paying for an undercooked product. When you pay my rent, you can tell me what to do with my money. Until then I'll spend it and my time on the community we are building at Pathfinder Online, which is far, far and away the healthiest I've ever been around for a full PvP MMO. If there were a more complete game out there that would make me happier, I'd play it, believe me I would.
So go ahead and caw away in your own "echo chamber" of MMO rumor mills and half truths like miserable crows. Meanwhile my life is full and my eyes are wide open and I am happy with my game.
So go ahead and caw away in your own "echo chamber" of MMO rumor mills and half truths like miserable crows. Meanwhile my life is full and my eyes are wide open and I am happy with my game.
Until now I didn't want to play this game because of the CEO and how the payment is badly mismanaged.
Now I don't want to play it because miserable crows like me just can't handle enlightened open eyes guys like you.
First of all, the CEO of the game did not blame us, he simply encouraged word of mouth promotion and told us how to do it if we wanted to. They gave us trial keys and told us where we could offer them on sites like this one. They want to grow the game like EVE did and this is one of those methods. From that which actually happened to being :"guilted like jewish children", well wow, OP has got some issues he needs to address, good luck with that. We weren't blamed for anything, that's absurd, I have no idea where OP would get that impression. There was no crime here.
Secondly, Early Enrollment is akin to a paid Beta with no XP rollbacks, that is true. Stop saying it's alpha, it's definitely not alpha, it's a functional game with lots of working features that hundreds of people are enjoying. They have been honest about its current state and those who want to pay for it do, big deal. They are adding BIG chunks monthly, there is absolutely zero indication development for the game is halting or slowing down in any way.
Thirdly, I don't actually expect PFO to have too many people playing throughout the paid Beta and I doubt Ryan Dancey does either. With 5,000 paying accounts they probably pay their salaries for the entirety of 1.5 year Beta and for an inidie company that is golden. I've built two projects with similar pay as you go models so I get what he's doing. They don't even need to break even, the goal is just not be too far in the red during development. Again, not a crime, the risks of large scale development is exactly what keeps Hollywood and major gaming in major ruts constantly.
Lastly, I know I am paying for an undercooked product. When you pay my rent, you can tell me what to do with my money. Until then I'll spend it and my time on the community we are building at Pathfinder Online, which is far, far and away the healthiest I've ever been around for a full PvP MMO. If there were a more complete game out there that would make me happier, I'd play it, believe me I would.
So go ahead and caw away in your own "echo chamber" of MMO rumor mills and half truths like miserable crows. Meanwhile my life is full and my eyes are wide open and I am happy with my game.
lol
anyway they effectively already did a soft launch with early enro...actually ons second thought im not going to go into this. fact is this games marketing people have no idea what they are doing. if the CEO has to ask the player base to hype a game(not even going to go into the blame/complain game) then there are serious issues. the only people in an echo chamber are the developers if they believe that trying to use word of mouth about a "minimum viable product" as a significant and almost sole source(from what ive seen) of advertising is an effective strategy.
I don't see a problem with what he said or how he said it. It seems like the have basically soft launched and that things are slowing down. I don't see anything wrong with encouraging people to recruit, I just see it as a sign of imminent demise.
Every single post you've ever made on this forum is in relation to PFO. You're obviously a huge fan, which also makes you hugely biased. Try taking off the rose colored glasses, you'll see things more clearly that way.
Wait, I play a game that I like, and that's a problem? Dude, try think through what you just said. The reason I play PFO is because I like it. It's fun. We have a lot of fun playing it. We like the social dimensions, the depth and complexity of character building and especially the depth in crafting/economic development. We like it so much, that even though the game is pretty minimum in some respects--graphics are improving but still pretty weak, client isn't optimized, only 4 classes/3 races in currently--we still play it and have a ton of fun.
And so I shouldn't like it because what? Because you don't like? Just to help you in the future, taste and preference isn't bias. Bias is selective evidentiality. So "I like X, Y and Z enough to compensate for P, D, & Q," is the friggin' opposite of bias, because you're explicitly including evidence broadly and then interpreting it in context.
Just for clarity's sake, you played PFO, and didn't enjoy it? What settlement were you in?
The thread referenced in the OP was directed at Settlements because we're experiencing a phase of development where the smaller Settlements are feeling that they have existential questions about the game. Being a small Settlement in a game that has very large Settlements can become a huge problem - Pareto's Principle arises quickly.
I've been trying to help Settlements of all size recruit. We know that the Settlement system is one of the key unique features of the game that you won't find in any mainstream MMO. The idea that you work as a part of a very large group to accomplish persistent objectives and that the success of your group impacts the abilities of your character is one of the things I'm most proud about in terms of an innovative and new design idea. But to make it work, Settlements need to grow in size.
They can recruit in-game, or they can recruit out of game. In-game recruiting may be easier because they're talking to people who have already jumped through all the hoops to get into the game and set up a character. But it's also tough because a lot of those people are already connected with a friend or social group and they're not looking to join a bunch of strangers.
Recruiting out-of-game means that when they bring someone in, that person is likely to be very interested in talking to their recruiter. Since recruitment is "free" - we give players 15 day free trial invites they can use to recruit - there's no monetary cost. The cost is the time it takes to go out into the internet to where MMO players congregate and make new friends.
Settlements recruiting outside of the game is good for the game too. We need to grow our player population. The compelling message right now about Pathfinder Online is that this is a chance to watch an MMO be built from the inside and to have real, meaningful impact on that design. The design is centered on Settlements and so the best way to participate in that "Crowdforging" process is to be a member of a Settlement that is busy doing the things that Settlements do. There's a synergy there between the needs of the game (to grow) the needs of the Settlements (to grow) and the needs of the potential recruits (to have a fun game experience).
If anyone reading this would like to try the game for 15 days, please email customer.support@goblinworks.com and I'll be happy to issue you a Trial invite so you can see it for yourself!
Around the time I got involved in Pathfinder Online (about a year ago) my attention got drawn to a discussion where Ryan did a fairly detailed talk about how tight MMO players are in relation to the rest of the economy (he used much nice words than that). Throughout my participation, I have been amazed at how there are people who will drop a hundred dollars at a bar, or ten bucks on a movie or a book a couple of times a month that occupies them for two, three, maybe four hours, yet a lot of MMO players feel like a game that entertains them for hours every weekend, (or even every day) isn't worth $15.00 a month. I get that there is plenty of good stuff to do online that costs nothing (after sunk costs) but so what? Pathfinder Online is semi-customized content that has the capacity to provide a unique experience for each player.
The participants in early enrollment are getting to have direct input into how the world is shaping up. Every new release (which are coming fast, at a significant bump every three weeks) has content that was modified because that's what the early enrollment players wanted, or because the server population wasn't at the level expected for the content. They have been remarkable about modifying the content to provide a positive experience for the players.
Yes, there are lots of flaws. For some people, those flaws hurt more than others. Some roles are harder to flesh out in a fun way, without spreading out into cross-over characters. But they've been open from the beginning that Early Enrollment is not for everyone. It's for people who understand what they are trying to build. PFO has the capacity (and in many ways is already) to be something unique, that will give sandbox fans a real gem of a toy.
I have little patience for anyone who spends more than 5 hours a month playing the current game, yet feels it isn't worth $15.00 a month. Personally, I'm getting around 10-20 hours a week, so my cost-for-entertainment (after factoring in sunk costs like internet and computer related expenses) is a maximum of about 50 cents per hour, which is way less than 1/4 (25%) of the cost of being entertained by a new movie or a book from my favourite author. In a good month, it's going to be no under 10% of the cost. That represents a huge entertainment value-per-dollar in a game that isn't even finished.
I've spent a lot of money, and if the game fails, I'll be sad. But I won't be sad that I spent the money, I'll be sad that a great idea didn't make it. One of many great ideas that deserve a little bit of support.
It is not worth $15 per month, it is just worth $15 per month to YOU. The majority of people are not going to pay $50 for a game then commit to $15 per month when it is in an alpha state. It is just not realistic to expect any kind of population with this pay model. You can rationalize it all you want, in the end you belong to a very small minority of gamers.
Well, he wanted press/attention... now he's got it. This thread hasn't left my front newsfeed in 24 hours.
BTW: I play Pathfinder Society about once or twice a month. I'm basically his ideal target audience. The game sounds horrible, looks horrible, is priced horrible... and even if it were completely free, I'd probably play it for 10 minutes and quit.
It's an era for MMO's where many of even the biggest AAA developers have been humbled by the subscription model and have had to go FTP on fully developed, content rich games.
Now you get some indie developer trying to charge a buy-in and a $15 monthly sub for a bare-bones, pre-alpha game.
Did they really not see a problem with this?
Ah, well. When you've failed at your job, I guess you want to blame anyone but yourself.
This expresses my thoughts perfectly. I look forward to this game failing before Beta.
The whole thing is starting to remind me of the War Z nonsense. I wonder if he realises just how much negativity he's generating around the game or if he doesn't care and is only interested in the quick buck.
@umcorian - if you'll email me at customer.support@goblinworks.com, I'll be happy to give you a free 15 day trial, and you can check the game out at no cost and see if it exceeds your assumptions. You DO sound like an ideal recruit - why not give it a whirl?
Around the time I got involved in Pathfinder Online (about a year ago) my attention got drawn to a discussion where Ryan did a fairly detailed talk about how tight MMO players are in relation to the rest of the economy (he used much nice words than that). Throughout my participation, I have been amazed at how there are people who will drop a hundred dollars at a bar, or ten bucks on a movie or a book a couple of times a month that occupies them for two, three, maybe four hours, yet a lot of MMO players feel like a game that entertains them for hours every weekend, (or even every day) isn't worth $15.00 a month. I get that there is plenty of good stuff to do online that costs nothing (after sunk costs) but so what? Pathfinder Online is semi-customized content that has the capacity to provide a unique experience for each player.
The participants in early enrollment are getting to have direct input into how the world is shaping up. Every new release (which are coming fast, at a significant bump every three weeks) has content that was modified because that's what the early enrollment players wanted, or because the server population wasn't at the level expected for the content. They have been remarkable about modifying the content to provide a positive experience for the players.
Yes, there are lots of flaws. For some people, those flaws hurt more than others. Some roles are harder to flesh out in a fun way, without spreading out into cross-over characters. But they've been open from the beginning that Early Enrollment is not for everyone. It's for people who understand what they are trying to build. PFO has the capacity (and in many ways is already) to be something unique, that will give sandbox fans a real gem of a toy.
I have little patience for anyone who spends more than 5 hours a month playing the current game, yet feels it isn't worth $15.00 a month. Personally, I'm getting around 10-20 hours a week, so my cost-for-entertainment (after factoring in sunk costs like internet and computer related expenses) is a maximum of about 50 cents per hour, which is way less than 1/4 (25%) of the cost of being entertained by a new movie or a book from my favourite author. In a good month, it's going to be no under 10% of the cost. That represents a huge entertainment value-per-dollar in a game that isn't even finished.
I've spent a lot of money, and if the game fails, I'll be sad. But I won't be sad that I spent the money, I'll be sad that a great idea didn't make it. One of many great ideas that deserve a little bit of support.
This game doesn't exist in a vacuum. Charging $15 a month for an alpha or beta is a complete joke considering fully released and polished games charge the same or less.
Pathfinder is an alpha product, or looks and plays as bad as any alpha product.
Just because there will be no wipe on launch doesn't mean it's not alpha quality. Just because the game has time based progression like eve doesn't mean it's worth a monthly sub to park an account.
Graphics:
Looks like a game made 15 years ago, or a project made by bad art school students. The graphics are really ugly and completely unprofessional.
Gameplay:
Clunky and buggy, the worst combat I've ever experenced in an mmo! Definitely alpha quality combat and nothing anyone should be paying for. If the combat or gameplay is not fun, the game will not be fun. It is not fun in it's current state!
Engine:
Made in a completely free game engine for amature developers to toy around in. The unity engine cannot compete with a proper game engine, and will require much more work than an established MMO game engine. With the very small dev team and the amount of work they will need to do to make this free game engine to work as a proper mmo you can expect this game to be in this alpha state for YEARS.
I am intrigued by another "detail". According to his own words, he already spent more than 4 000 000 $ on the game, and will invest 2-3 millions more, info from recent Pathfinder AMA here.
But the (quite dated and unappealing, even generic in some cases) results I can see simply don`t fit with these huge numbers. For a sandbox comparison, that`s much more than Crowfall`s current total budget (they have around 4m ATM, and projected total pre-launch budget should be around 6m, in Walton`s words) and on par with Camelot Unchained`s total budget so far.
PS I found the exact quote from that AMA: " We've spent more than $4 million, and we'll likely spend $2 - $3 million more before we get to Open Enrollment "Note the "before the open enrollment" part.
What I am wondering about is:
1) Did he really spend all that money on the game?
2) If so, then what exactly did he spend the money on? and
2: 80% of our expense goes to the salaries of the people who make the game. The other 20% goes to things like licensing tools, rent, legal fees, etc. We also had substantial costs associated with fulfilling the kickstarter rewards.
3: About 1/3rd of the capital spent so far came from Kickstarter. The other 2/3rds represent investment into the company.
Making an MMO is expensive. That we have succeeded so far at the budget we have spent is a tremendous victory.
Typically in high-tech companies it is a safe assumption that every "developer" has a total overhead of salary, benefits, workstation, software, tax, rent, etc. of ~$100k/year. We currently have a team of about 20 people. The only non-developer in the company is me.
To put that in comparison, CCP spent over $75 million on World of Darkness, and failed to get it to market. It's widely reported that the cost of Star Wars: The Old Republic was more than $200 million. Most AAA Theme Park MMOs released in the past 5 years have had budgets in excess of $100 million.
We have been in full production since January of 2013. Prior to that we spent about a year in partial production getting the company formed, recruiting our leads, and making the Technology Demo. So we have had about 2 years of nearly full burn rate to get to this point.
We have not, as of yet, invested any substantial money on marketing the game. We've been working on improving it steadily and relying on grassroots support as we iterate towards a product that we can do a more widespread marketing campaign for. We're getting there.
Making videogames is a tough, expensive business. Making an MMO is the toughest, most expensive part of that business. I'm incredibly proud of the team and the work they've achieved so far.
Comments
I actually found the depth to parts of Pathfinder intriguing. Classes, crafting and so forth. However, I think its asinine that they are trying to charge a retail price AND a full retail subscription fee ($15) to play a game in an alpha state.
Look, I'd pay the $50 if it was free until launch. I'd even pay maybe $5 a month at this point just to contribute. However, I found it nothing short of insulting to hear that they were trying to get me to pay for both a box fee and subscription for an unfinished product, in an alpha state no less.
Yeah, it's nuts to charge a sub for game in this state. From reading on their forums, it seems that a lot of the current players are holding on not because of what the game currently offers, but because of the potential they see in it. You aren't going to attract, or at least maintain, sub-paying players based on potential alone. People are going to play for a bit, get disillusioned, and quit. It's not like this game is on KS in a concept-only phase, where people's hopes will spring eternal. They're going to play and get bitter.
My opinion. Maybe the active and potential player base for this game is a special snowflake.
You should probably re-read the entire thread, rather than just cherry picking a single statement and twisting it to fit your definition of what was said.
Every single post you've ever made on this forum is in relation to PFO. You're obviously a huge fan, which also makes you hugely biased. Try taking off the rose colored glasses, you'll see things more clearly that way.
I wrote a five paragraph response to him when he posted the other thread awhile back about answering questions. It was exceptionally well written and did not contain anything that would violate the rules of the forum.
He reported me for it when he realized that answering some of my questions would paint him and the game in a negative light, and the moderators here actually deleted my response and then warned me for flaming.
I'm the first to admit that I'm extremely outspoken and often very blunt, sometimes to the point of being a prick. However, that particular situation was absolutely ridiculous. I wasn't doing anything I shouldn't have been, far from it actually.
I still don't understand why it was deleted. The only real explanation is that the staff on this site catered to him because of his position as a CEO, and my previous posting history (which is absolutely questionable at times, and deserving of a warning or worse) was taken into account when they reviewed the report.
First of all, the CEO of the game did not blame us, he simply encouraged word of mouth promotion and told us how to do it if we wanted to. They gave us trial keys and told us where we could offer them on sites like this one. They want to grow the game like EVE did and this is one of those methods. From that which actually happened to being :"guilted like jewish children", well wow, OP has got some issues he needs to address, good luck with that. We weren't blamed for anything, that's absurd, I have no idea where OP would get that impression. There was no crime here.
Secondly, Early Enrollment is akin to a paid Beta with no XP rollbacks, that is true. Stop saying it's alpha, it's definitely not alpha, it's a functional game with lots of working features that hundreds of people are enjoying. They have been honest about its current state and those who want to pay for it do, big deal. They are adding BIG chunks monthly, there is absolutely zero indication development for the game is halting or slowing down in any way.
Thirdly, I don't actually expect PFO to have too many people playing throughout the paid Beta and I doubt Ryan Dancey does either. With 5,000 paying accounts they probably pay their salaries for the entirety of 1.5 year Beta and for an inidie company that is golden. I've built two projects with similar pay as you go models so I get what he's doing. They don't even need to break even, the goal is just not be too far in the red during development. Again, not a crime, the risks of large scale development is exactly what keeps Hollywood and major gaming in major ruts constantly.
Lastly, I know I am paying for an undercooked product. When you pay my rent, you can tell me what to do with my money. Until then I'll spend it and my time on the community we are building at Pathfinder Online, which is far, far and away the healthiest I've ever been around for a full PvP MMO. If there were a more complete game out there that would make me happier, I'd play it, believe me I would.
So go ahead and caw away in your own "echo chamber" of MMO rumor mills and half truths like miserable crows. Meanwhile my life is full and my eyes are wide open and I am happy with my game.
Until now I didn't want to play this game because of the CEO and how the payment is badly mismanaged.
Now I don't want to play it because miserable crows like me just can't handle enlightened open eyes guys like you.
lol
anyway they effectively already did a soft launch with early enro...actually ons second thought im not going to go into this. fact is this games marketing people have no idea what they are doing. if the CEO has to ask the player base to hype a game(not even going to go into the blame/complain game) then there are serious issues. the only people in an echo chamber are the developers if they believe that trying to use word of mouth about a "minimum viable product" as a significant and almost sole source(from what ive seen) of advertising is an effective strategy.
Wa min God! Se æx on min heafod is!
Wait, I play a game that I like, and that's a problem? Dude, try think through what you just said. The reason I play PFO is because I like it. It's fun. We have a lot of fun playing it. We like the social dimensions, the depth and complexity of character building and especially the depth in crafting/economic development. We like it so much, that even though the game is pretty minimum in some respects--graphics are improving but still pretty weak, client isn't optimized, only 4 classes/3 races in currently--we still play it and have a ton of fun.
And so I shouldn't like it because what? Because you don't like? Just to help you in the future, taste and preference isn't bias. Bias is selective evidentiality. So "I like X, Y and Z enough to compensate for P, D, & Q," is the friggin' opposite of bias, because you're explicitly including evidence broadly and then interpreting it in context.
Just for clarity's sake, you played PFO, and didn't enjoy it? What settlement were you in?
Do the RIGHT THING: come be a Paladin with us! http://ozemsvigil.guildlaunch.com/
Hi all!
A couple of responses:
The thread referenced in the OP was directed at Settlements because we're experiencing a phase of development where the smaller Settlements are feeling that they have existential questions about the game. Being a small Settlement in a game that has very large Settlements can become a huge problem - Pareto's Principle arises quickly.
I've been trying to help Settlements of all size recruit. We know that the Settlement system is one of the key unique features of the game that you won't find in any mainstream MMO. The idea that you work as a part of a very large group to accomplish persistent objectives and that the success of your group impacts the abilities of your character is one of the things I'm most proud about in terms of an innovative and new design idea. But to make it work, Settlements need to grow in size.
They can recruit in-game, or they can recruit out of game. In-game recruiting may be easier because they're talking to people who have already jumped through all the hoops to get into the game and set up a character. But it's also tough because a lot of those people are already connected with a friend or social group and they're not looking to join a bunch of strangers.
Recruiting out-of-game means that when they bring someone in, that person is likely to be very interested in talking to their recruiter. Since recruitment is "free" - we give players 15 day free trial invites they can use to recruit - there's no monetary cost. The cost is the time it takes to go out into the internet to where MMO players congregate and make new friends.
Settlements recruiting outside of the game is good for the game too. We need to grow our player population. The compelling message right now about Pathfinder Online is that this is a chance to watch an MMO be built from the inside and to have real, meaningful impact on that design. The design is centered on Settlements and so the best way to participate in that "Crowdforging" process is to be a member of a Settlement that is busy doing the things that Settlements do. There's a synergy there between the needs of the game (to grow) the needs of the Settlements (to grow) and the needs of the potential recruits (to have a fun game experience).
If anyone reading this would like to try the game for 15 days, please email customer.support@goblinworks.com and I'll be happy to issue you a Trial invite so you can see it for yourself!
It is not worth $15 per month, it is just worth $15 per month to YOU. The majority of people are not going to pay $50 for a game then commit to $15 per month when it is in an alpha state. It is just not realistic to expect any kind of population with this pay model. You can rationalize it all you want, in the end you belong to a very small minority of gamers.
Well, he wanted press/attention... now he's got it. This thread hasn't left my front newsfeed in 24 hours.
BTW: I play Pathfinder Society about once or twice a month. I'm basically his ideal target audience. The game sounds horrible, looks horrible, is priced horrible... and even if it were completely free, I'd probably play it for 10 minutes and quit.
This expresses my thoughts perfectly. I look forward to this game failing before Beta.
@umcorian - if you'll email me at customer.support@goblinworks.com, I'll be happy to give you a free 15 day trial, and you can check the game out at no cost and see if it exceeds your assumptions. You DO sound like an ideal recruit - why not give it a whirl?
This game doesn't exist in a vacuum. Charging $15 a month for an alpha or beta is a complete joke considering fully released and polished games charge the same or less.
He should just settle for what he has. It's not like Pathfinder is a AAA title.
He should be worrying more about development and release schedules, before marketing.
Pathfinder is an alpha product, or looks and plays as bad as any alpha product.
Just because there will be no wipe on launch doesn't mean it's not alpha quality. Just because the game has time based progression like eve doesn't mean it's worth a monthly sub to park an account.
Graphics:
Looks like a game made 15 years ago, or a project made by bad art school students. The graphics are really ugly and completely unprofessional.
Gameplay:
Clunky and buggy, the worst combat I've ever experenced in an mmo! Definitely alpha quality combat and nothing anyone should be paying for. If the combat or gameplay is not fun, the game will not be fun. It is not fun in it's current state!
Engine:
Made in a completely free game engine for amature developers to toy around in. The unity engine cannot compete with a proper game engine, and will require much more work than an established MMO game engine. With the very small dev team and the amount of work they will need to do to make this free game engine to work as a proper mmo you can expect this game to be in this alpha state for YEARS.
I am intrigued by another "detail". According to his own words, he already spent more than 4 000 000 $ on the game, and will invest 2-3 millions more, info from recent Pathfinder AMA here.
But the (quite dated and unappealing, even generic in some cases) results I can see simply don`t fit with these huge numbers. For a sandbox comparison, that`s much more than Crowfall`s current total budget (they have around 4m ATM, and projected total pre-launch budget should be around 6m, in Walton`s words) and on par with Camelot Unchained`s total budget so far.
PS I found the exact quote from that AMA: " We've spent more than $4 million, and we'll likely spend $2 - $3 million more before we get to Open Enrollment " Note the "before the open enrollment" part.
What I am wondering about is:
1) Did he really spend all that money on the game?
2) If so, then what exactly did he spend the money on? and
3) Where did all these millions come from?
1: Yes, that's roughly our budget.
2: 80% of our expense goes to the salaries of the people who make the game. The other 20% goes to things like licensing tools, rent, legal fees, etc. We also had substantial costs associated with fulfilling the kickstarter rewards.
3: About 1/3rd of the capital spent so far came from Kickstarter. The other 2/3rds represent investment into the company.
Making an MMO is expensive. That we have succeeded so far at the budget we have spent is a tremendous victory.
Typically in high-tech companies it is a safe assumption that every "developer" has a total overhead of salary, benefits, workstation, software, tax, rent, etc. of ~$100k/year. We currently have a team of about 20 people. The only non-developer in the company is me.
To put that in comparison, CCP spent over $75 million on World of Darkness, and failed to get it to market. It's widely reported that the cost of Star Wars: The Old Republic was more than $200 million. Most AAA Theme Park MMOs released in the past 5 years have had budgets in excess of $100 million.
We have been in full production since January of 2013. Prior to that we spent about a year in partial production getting the company formed, recruiting our leads, and making the Technology Demo. So we have had about 2 years of nearly full burn rate to get to this point.
We have not, as of yet, invested any substantial money on marketing the game. We've been working on improving it steadily and relying on grassroots support as we iterate towards a product that we can do a more widespread marketing campaign for. We're getting there.
Making videogames is a tough, expensive business. Making an MMO is the toughest, most expensive part of that business. I'm incredibly proud of the team and the work they've achieved so far.