I would try it (without paying money) if it would run on my system. I have no issues running newer games. Witcher 3 looks great, although not max settings. PFO stuttered so bad that it was unplayable. I was unable to easily control mouse look because of the terrible stutter. Maybe there was something that I could do to "fix" that, but the fact that I have to do more than install the game and play is enough to make me not care about trying it.
Originally posted by killion81 I would try it (without paying money) if it would run on my system. I have no issues running newer games. Witcher 3 looks great, although not max settings. PFO stuttered so bad that it was unplayable. I was unable to easily control mouse look because of the terrible stutter. Maybe there was something that I could do to "fix" that, but the fact that I have to do more than install the game and play is enough to make me not care about trying it.
That is definitely a turn off in this age of "plug and play". Not to knock anyone for what they like or dislike or even suggest that age is relevant to your opinion but:
In the way back days, talking about Commodore 64 or even the fantastic Commodore 128!!! here, you might just be surprised by how much puter tweaking that we had to do to get almost ANY game to work properly.
No more "BOX" fee. Free 15 day trials at: goblinworks.com/download/ Ozem's Vigil: The largest force for Holy Justice in the River Kingdoms. Are You Ready to Smite Evil? ozemsvigil.guildlaunch.com
Nothing. I won't be playing Pathfinder Online. I've got no problem with the developers creating a game they want to play that isn't a game that I want to play.
"I used to think the worst thing in life was to be all alone. It's not. The worst thing in life is to end up with people who make you feel all alone." Robin Williams
After how this new MMO has been managed, how it has been funded, and the problems associated with those two aspects... My suggestion would be a near total replacement of anyone in a management position with this project and a full legal investigation of all parties involved with this project since day one.
Lemme guess, you're going to prefer charges under section 12 of the How I Think Games Should Be Made Act? LOL
Honestly I don't think I can give any useful feedback for improvement, but I will say this...I had a 15 day trial that I did not pay for. Even then, I could not find any compelling reasons to play. It is just vastly underdeveloped.
That is why in an earlier post I said my want was simple but unachievable. I was a KS backer of PFO, like many table top players of Pathfinder, and have done quite well out of the deal - I sold my account and grabbed all of the Pathfinder goodies that came with it and ran off with my plunder. Why did I get out? This game is so far away from the concept of TT Pathfinder that it is difficult to conceive that many would be think that the two were connected.
Like Juliet opining that her rose could still be as fragrant, the game should never have been called PFO (maybe Romeo Online?). Each time I see the name Pathfinder Online, I think of the great game and not what is being presented here and die a little more inside.
Oh and by the way any fantasy game where a person can not sit on a chair (with a lead that can't understand why it is needed) shows paucity of ambition and imagination - this was a discussion Paizo boards point back in the days before PFO was released for beta.
I wish the players who are currently playing, all the best and I hope that the game becomes the game that you want it to be. Good luck with Romeo Online.
Well I think that the pricing model simply doesn't work now. Unfortunately, the P2P path is littered with the corpses of those who have gone that route. Oh, and none of those games released the game and requested subscription fees for something that sounds so..... incomplete.
I can address the issue of why the game mechanic isn't identical to the tabletop game.
The tabletop game is licensed with the Open Gaming License. That license requires that Open Game Content - the copyrighted materials that are covered by the license - must be conveyed to each recipient free of any additional terms or conditions. The only licensing terms that recipients can be bound to are the OGL itself.
A computer program requires additional licensing terms unless the entire thing was written from scratch and was not covered by any other copyright license. In practical terms that's impossible for any large project. We use all sorts of third-party tools and software and they all require us to make certain licensing requirements on our users so there is no way we can use the OGL, which means we can't use Open Game Content.
Futhermore, as a service, we want to bind players to various terms of behavior and policy, and we could not require that if we complied with the OGL, so the OGL is really an impossible thing to use with an MMO.
Even if we could use the tabletop game exactly as written, we wouldn't. The tabletop game is designed for asymmetric timescales. Player time and game time are not the same. You can take as long as your GM and group will tolerate to decide what action you'll take, flip through rulebooks, talk about strategy with your group, etc. The on-line game is a realtime game; player time and game time are identical. You need to be able to make decisions inside a game loop operating in realtime and that means that the choices you make have to be limited to some practical subset of "everything you could possibly do".
The tabletop game is also designed so that you will progress from 1st level to 20th level at a rate of 1 level per 12 hours of play (roughly), or 3 average sessions. That's 240 hours of game time. If the progression in the MMO were the same, many players would hit that goal in a month, and most players could hit it in 6 months. It's just too short a time frame for an MMO. It also has the problem that some characters advance much more quickly (deriving XP from doing things in game) which rapidly segments the player community with all sorts of well understood problems (which is why most theme parks are a short race to the level cap and then a long pause that's driven by gear rather than xp between updates). Since we want to have a shallower, flatter power curve, we don't want players to be able to manipulate their character's level just by playing excessively crazy amounts of time.
The tabletop game is designed to feature heroic adventurers. The MMO is a superset of the tabletop game. We need game systems that make sense for a much wider array of character types - crafters, diplomats, explorers, soldiers, bandits, teamsters, etc. Rather than having an entirely different game system for each of those potential types of characters we want one basically unified game system that can be extended to accommodate a lot of different types of experience. Making that core universal system means not using the core game rules from the tabletop verbatim.
Finally there are all sorts of issues that the tabletop game deals with via GM fiat. In the tabletop game it is unlikely that most 1st level characters in most games would ever experience having a 20th level fully equipped character show up and give them +5 armor with +5 magical enhancements and a +5 vorpal sword. That would happen constantly in an MMO. So there has to be limits on what a character can do with the gear they get or suddenly all that will matter is gear. There are all sorts of situations where that is the case, and in an MMO we have to have a rules-based system not rely on GM fiat to keep the game running in a meaningful way.
Do not allow Beta earned xp to count at launch and improve the combat so it doesn't play like a game from 1999. I'd consider giving it a go if those two changes happened, I followed this game for a while but almost all interest has been lost.
Haxus Council Member 21 year MMO veteran PvP Raid Leader Lover of The Witcher & CD Projekt Red
Originally posted by Alomar Do not allow Beta earned xp to count at launch and improve the combat so it doesn't play like a game from 1999. I'd consider giving it a go if those two changes happened, I followed this game for a while but almost all interest has been lost.
Not trying to knock one of your requirements, just expanding on and exploring it.
Do not allow Beta earned xp to count at launch... (I won't touch you calling it a Beta. To you, it is a Beta. That's all that matters there.)
Any suggestions on what to do for the current players that have paid for their xp?
Are there any realistic estimates that show there would be a dramatic increase (at OE) of players if everyone's xp was wiped?
How about a year after OE? Won't prospective players be saying "I would play, but I am a year behind. I could never catch up"...?
Just my 2 cp. I think that there would be more damage done by a wipe than there would be gained, but I am willing to discuss the possibilities from a current player's view point.
*It isn't just xp. There are many, many hours put in to get the achievements that allow you to spend the xp.
*There would be almost no "world" for what could be a great many players. Right now, part of what we are doing is building the infrastructure for future players. Markets, political rivalries, alliances, actual gear to use, groups to join, history AND current functionality is being created right now. Wipe it and it would be a pretty boring world for the first 6 months of play.
No more "BOX" fee. Free 15 day trials at: goblinworks.com/download/ Ozem's Vigil: The largest force for Holy Justice in the River Kingdoms. Are You Ready to Smite Evil? ozemsvigil.guildlaunch.com
If this game is finished and ready for a sub model it is DOA. The game looks to be in alpha still. No need to wish for improvements if this is as good as it gets, dead game is dead.
Originally posted by Alomar Do not allow Beta earned xp to count at launch and improve the combat so it doesn't play like a game from 1999. I'd consider giving it a go if those two changes happened, I followed this game for a while but almost all interest has been lost.
Not trying to knock one of your requirements, just expanding on and exploring it.
Do not allow Beta earned xp to count at launch... (I won't touch you calling it a Beta. To you, it is a Beta. That's all that matters there.)
Any suggestions on what to do for the current players that have paid for their xp?
Are there any realistic estimates that show there would be a dramatic increase (at OE) of players if everyone's xp was wiped?
How about a year after OE? Won't prospective players be saying "I would play, but I am a year behind. I could never catch up"...?
Just my 2 cp. I think that there would be more damage done by a wipe than there would be gained, but I am willing to discuss the possibilities from a current player's view point.
*It isn't just xp. There are many, many hours put in to get the achievements that allow you to spend the xp.
*There would be almost no "world" for what could be a great many players. Right now, part of what we are doing is building the infrastructure for future players. Markets, political rivalries, alliances, actual gear to use, groups to join, history AND current functionality is being created right now. Wipe it and it would be a pretty boring world for the first 6 months of play.
If a player is paying for their xp, does that constitute it as a pay-to-win?
Originally posted by Alomar Do not allow Beta earned xp to count at launch and improve the combat so it doesn't play like a game from 1999. I'd consider giving it a go if those two changes happened, I followed this game for a while but almost all interest has been lost.
Not trying to knock one of your requirements, just expanding on and exploring it.
Do not allow Beta earned xp to count at launch... (I won't touch you calling it a Beta. To you, it is a Beta. That's all that matters there.)
Any suggestions on what to do for the current players that have paid for their xp?
Are there any realistic estimates that show there would be a dramatic increase (at OE) of players if everyone's xp was wiped?
How about a year after OE? Won't prospective players be saying "I would play, but I am a year behind. I could never catch up"...?
Just my 2 cp. I think that there would be more damage done by a wipe than there would be gained, but I am willing to discuss the possibilities from a current player's view point.
*It isn't just xp. There are many, many hours put in to get the achievements that allow you to spend the xp.
*There would be almost no "world" for what could be a great many players. Right now, part of what we are doing is building the infrastructure for future players. Markets, political rivalries, alliances, actual gear to use, groups to join, history AND current functionality is being created right now. Wipe it and it would be a pretty boring world for the first 6 months of play.
If a player is paying for their xp, does that constitute it as a pay-to-win?
How thinly do you split that hair?
Is it P2W for any game with a time based system to gain xp?
How about any game with a mandatory subscription or a f2p with optional sub?
What does this have to do with that question?
No more "BOX" fee. Free 15 day trials at: goblinworks.com/download/ Ozem's Vigil: The largest force for Holy Justice in the River Kingdoms. Are You Ready to Smite Evil? ozemsvigil.guildlaunch.com
A few things are pretty obvious. First, there are more people who have tried playing PFO, than there are currently playing. Secondly, there are more potential players that have looked at it, or read about it and have decided to pass on even trying it for free (ie. 15 day trial).
So, I pose the question here, in the hopes that the makers of Pathfinder Online might see where they may have to alter their plans in order to attract more interest in playing the game long term.
In a CONSTRUCTIVE manner, please list three to five changes you would like to see (especially if you tried the game and you actually know a bit about how the game works).
There were times when the games were released when they were actually finished and ready for release. Today it is not anymore so.
There is nothing wrong with PFO. It is simply unfinished game. And judging from my free trial, it will need at least 1-2 year of hard work to actually be a game ready for release.
I am not in habit of playing a game for 2 years before its released. Or 2 years beta testing , people used to get pay for that - not pay subscription to beta test unfinished game for 2 years.
Who ever thought of that is out of his mind.
So, nothing is wrong with PFO game. I am sure it will be good, once its released in 2 years.
But please stop being greedy asking people to pay to beta test the game.
There were times when the games were released when they were actually finished and ready for release. Today it is not anymore so.
There is nothing wrong with PFO. It is simply unfinished game. And judging from my free trial, it will need at least 1-2 year of hard work to actually be a game ready for release.
I am not in habit of playing a game for 2 years before its released. Or 2 years beta testing , people used to get pay for that - not pay subscription to beta test unfinished game for 2 years.
Who ever thought of that is out of his mind.
So, nothing is wrong with PFO game. I am sure it will be good, once its released in 2 years.
But please stop being greedy asking people to pay to beta test the game.
The crusaders, evangelists and missionaries will say that "you are not paying to beta test the game, you are paying for the experience points and the privilege to build the game and the community that the Open Enrollment players will step into".
The problem with that is the contradictions and the pipe dream aspect of it.
1. Contradiction: Goblin Works is incapable to recognize or unwilling to admit that veteran players will have a big advantage over new players, especially the longer this EE process goes.
2. Contradiction: Since anyone can now request a free trial, and then choose to resub and play, that my friends is Open Enrollment. To say it is not open enrollment is a contradiction of the reality that iit is, only possible difference is the lack of advertisement.
3. Pipe Dream: In two years time (because GW keeps on saying they are in year 2 or 3 of a 5 year development process) the soon to be obsolete UNity 4 engine pushed to its limits will be able to compete with more advanced engines.
When your starting point is 3 miles behind the rest of the racers, and you quite frankly move slower then most of them, you will never catch up.
4, Pipe Dream: That PFO will shift from EE to OE, opening the door for new players into a world that is well populated, vibrant and innovative or unique.
They did not strike the iron when it was hot, PFO was released into alpha / beta / ee far too early with silly word smithing gimmicks, and terrible business model (roundly rejected by virtually all) and a vision that did not appeal to the Pathfinder community or the MMO community in sustainable numbers.
Is there some enjoyment in playing the game with friends? Of course there is, but not because of the game, but because of the friends.
Played: E&B, SWG, Eve, WoW, COH, WAR, POTBS, AOC, LOTRO, AUTO.A, AO, FE, TR, WWII, MWO, TSW, SWTOR, GW2, NWO, WoP, RUST, LIF, SOA, MORTAL, DFUW, AA, TF, PFO, ALBO, and many many others....
PFO is clearly on my list for a long time already.
I aint knew its already good to go and have a look.
Well then, lets have a look ..
By all means, give it a look. The new player experience is quite good, for the trial period and if you hang around the starter area or join a company / settlement that is active.
The "roll into rate" from Free Trial to Subscription is the challenge for PFO.
Played: E&B, SWG, Eve, WoW, COH, WAR, POTBS, AOC, LOTRO, AUTO.A, AO, FE, TR, WWII, MWO, TSW, SWTOR, GW2, NWO, WoP, RUST, LIF, SOA, MORTAL, DFUW, AA, TF, PFO, ALBO, and many many others....
Yesterday I was asked via PM on the Paizo forums, what my impressions are of Albion Online?
I thought my response would be appropriate here as well, for several reasons:
First, like PFO, Albion Online is a game that is currently in early to mid stages of Alpha and it is being developed by a small team with a less than AAA budget.
Secondly, Albion is being portrayed as an Open World, PVP focused, Sandbox MMORPG and again much in the same way that PFO is.
Thirdly, the "end game" goal of both games is that guilds will compete for territorial control, with settlement sieges being the pinnacle event of the PVP (GvG) content.
Finally, both are fantasy based (although Albion is more of a Medieval fantasy - no Elves, Dwarves, Orcs or Goblins).
My PM to the inquisitive person (who shall remain nameless for his own protection, because the PFO community fanboys will not receive his questioning well).
Pros:
1. It has zoned PVP: Green = Safe (tiers 1-3); Yellow = Partial Loot (Tiers 4 - 5); Red = Full Loot (Tiers 6 and 7).
Even in the Yellow and Red Zone, you still have to declare yourself "Hostile" and you won;t be able to attack unless you do so. Once you declare, a number of Hostiles in the zone will go up by +1. So you can tell how many "Hostiles" in a zone when you first enter or remain there.
2. There is territorial control; player built settlements; GvG and AvA PVP; Player settlements can be captured and or destroyed.
3. After watching a very brief video, the game mechanics are very simple. The in-game tutorial is good enough to get you started, and takes about 5 minutes.
4. The game is solo friendly up to about Tier 4, but if you want to have access to tiers 5-7, probably need a group to travel more safely.
5. It is a PVP based game, and it is designed that way. No penalty for PVPing, unless you lose. No such thing as griefing, the expectation is, if you enter a PVP zone you are fair game.
6. Crafting - Gathering systems is are top notch; integrated in a way that makes sense; and self sufficient up to at least Tier 4.
Bottom Line, it is EVE with Swords!!
Cons:
1. The server just broke the 6000+ population mark, and they are having some lag and memory leak issues. This is however only alpha, and the largest population to stress the system thus far.
2. Not enough character detail can be seen. It is that stylized cartoonish look anyway, but it would be nice to be able to zoom in a bit closer.
3. Click to move is a bit of need in getting used to, but anyone with experience with top-down scrollers (ie Diablo) won't have an issue.
Summary - Comparison:
Albion is well worth the $49.99 price tag to get into the Alpha Testing (which will last for a few weeks).
The game plays more like a beta ready to release in 2 - 3 months, more so than a game that has had only one other major alpha phase.
Albion is made by a small team, with far less than what PFO had in KS money, and has an equal or less time of development. That is by far the most damning thing I can say as a comparison.
Goblin Works and specifically Ryan, is spending far too much time, money and game mechanics in limiting what players can do, instead of creating things for the players to do while playing game.
[A slight edit from the original in the last line]
I would add that Albion Online is being developed on a game engine that has potential growth, whereas PFO is using the soon to be obsolete Unity 4 engine.
Albion Online is also following the business model of F2P, which I understand some like it and others do not, but in the comparison F2P generates more revenue.
Played: E&B, SWG, Eve, WoW, COH, WAR, POTBS, AOC, LOTRO, AUTO.A, AO, FE, TR, WWII, MWO, TSW, SWTOR, GW2, NWO, WoP, RUST, LIF, SOA, MORTAL, DFUW, AA, TF, PFO, ALBO, and many many others....
Comments
That is definitely a turn off in this age of "plug and play". Not to knock anyone for what they like or dislike or even suggest that age is relevant to your opinion but:
In the way back days, talking about Commodore 64 or even the fantastic Commodore 128!!! here, you might just be surprised by how much puter tweaking that we had to do to get almost ANY game to work properly.
No more "BOX" fee. Free 15 day trials at: goblinworks.com/download/
Ozem's Vigil: The largest force for Holy Justice in the River Kingdoms.
Are You Ready to Smite Evil?
ozemsvigil.guildlaunch.com
Point of view is irrelevant. Being constructive is about a writing form, a way of expressing yourself, regardless of subject.
You are mistaking form for content.
Lemme guess, you're going to prefer charges under section 12 of the How I Think Games Should Be Made Act? LOL
Do the RIGHT THING: come be a Paladin with us! http://ozemsvigil.guildlaunch.com/
That is why in an earlier post I said my want was simple but unachievable. I was a KS backer of PFO, like many table top players of Pathfinder, and have done quite well out of the deal - I sold my account and grabbed all of the Pathfinder goodies that came with it and ran off with my plunder. Why did I get out? This game is so far away from the concept of TT Pathfinder that it is difficult to conceive that many would be think that the two were connected.
Like Juliet opining that her rose could still be as fragrant, the game should never have been called PFO (maybe Romeo Online?). Each time I see the name Pathfinder Online, I think of the great game and not what is being presented here and die a little more inside.
Oh and by the way any fantasy game where a person can not sit on a chair (with a lead that can't understand why it is needed) shows paucity of ambition and imagination - this was a discussion Paizo boards point back in the days before PFO was released for beta.
I wish the players who are currently playing, all the best and I hope that the game becomes the game that you want it to be. Good luck with Romeo Online.
I self identify as a monkey.
Well I think that the pricing model simply doesn't work now. Unfortunately, the P2P path is littered with the corpses of those who have gone that route. Oh, and none of those games released the game and requested subscription fees for something that sounds so..... incomplete.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
I can address the issue of why the game mechanic isn't identical to the tabletop game.
The tabletop game is licensed with the Open Gaming License. That license requires that Open Game Content - the copyrighted materials that are covered by the license - must be conveyed to each recipient free of any additional terms or conditions. The only licensing terms that recipients can be bound to are the OGL itself.
A computer program requires additional licensing terms unless the entire thing was written from scratch and was not covered by any other copyright license. In practical terms that's impossible for any large project. We use all sorts of third-party tools and software and they all require us to make certain licensing requirements on our users so there is no way we can use the OGL, which means we can't use Open Game Content.
Futhermore, as a service, we want to bind players to various terms of behavior and policy, and we could not require that if we complied with the OGL, so the OGL is really an impossible thing to use with an MMO.
Even if we could use the tabletop game exactly as written, we wouldn't. The tabletop game is designed for asymmetric timescales. Player time and game time are not the same. You can take as long as your GM and group will tolerate to decide what action you'll take, flip through rulebooks, talk about strategy with your group, etc. The on-line game is a realtime game; player time and game time are identical. You need to be able to make decisions inside a game loop operating in realtime and that means that the choices you make have to be limited to some practical subset of "everything you could possibly do".
The tabletop game is also designed so that you will progress from 1st level to 20th level at a rate of 1 level per 12 hours of play (roughly), or 3 average sessions. That's 240 hours of game time. If the progression in the MMO were the same, many players would hit that goal in a month, and most players could hit it in 6 months. It's just too short a time frame for an MMO. It also has the problem that some characters advance much more quickly (deriving XP from doing things in game) which rapidly segments the player community with all sorts of well understood problems (which is why most theme parks are a short race to the level cap and then a long pause that's driven by gear rather than xp between updates). Since we want to have a shallower, flatter power curve, we don't want players to be able to manipulate their character's level just by playing excessively crazy amounts of time.
The tabletop game is designed to feature heroic adventurers. The MMO is a superset of the tabletop game. We need game systems that make sense for a much wider array of character types - crafters, diplomats, explorers, soldiers, bandits, teamsters, etc. Rather than having an entirely different game system for each of those potential types of characters we want one basically unified game system that can be extended to accommodate a lot of different types of experience. Making that core universal system means not using the core game rules from the tabletop verbatim.
Finally there are all sorts of issues that the tabletop game deals with via GM fiat. In the tabletop game it is unlikely that most 1st level characters in most games would ever experience having a 20th level fully equipped character show up and give them +5 armor with +5 magical enhancements and a +5 vorpal sword. That would happen constantly in an MMO. So there has to be limits on what a character can do with the gear they get or suddenly all that will matter is gear. There are all sorts of situations where that is the case, and in an MMO we have to have a rules-based system not rely on GM fiat to keep the game running in a meaningful way.
21 year MMO veteran
PvP Raid Leader
Lover of The Witcher & CD Projekt Red
Not trying to knock one of your requirements, just expanding on and exploring it.
Do not allow Beta earned xp to count at launch... (I won't touch you calling it a Beta. To you, it is a Beta. That's all that matters there.)
Any suggestions on what to do for the current players that have paid for their xp?
Are there any realistic estimates that show there would be a dramatic increase (at OE) of players if everyone's xp was wiped?
How about a year after OE? Won't prospective players be saying "I would play, but I am a year behind. I could never catch up"...?
Just my 2 cp. I think that there would be more damage done by a wipe than there would be gained, but I am willing to discuss the possibilities from a current player's view point.
*It isn't just xp. There are many, many hours put in to get the achievements that allow you to spend the xp.
*There would be almost no "world" for what could be a great many players. Right now, part of what we are doing is building the infrastructure for future players. Markets, political rivalries, alliances, actual gear to use, groups to join, history AND current functionality is being created right now. Wipe it and it would be a pretty boring world for the first 6 months of play.
No more "BOX" fee. Free 15 day trials at: goblinworks.com/download/
Ozem's Vigil: The largest force for Holy Justice in the River Kingdoms.
Are You Ready to Smite Evil?
ozemsvigil.guildlaunch.com
If this game is finished and ready for a sub model it is DOA. The game looks to be in alpha still. No need to wish for improvements if this is as good as it gets, dead game is dead.
If a player is paying for their xp, does that constitute it as a pay-to-win?
How thinly do you split that hair?
Is it P2W for any game with a time based system to gain xp?
How about any game with a mandatory subscription or a f2p with optional sub?
What does this have to do with that question?
No more "BOX" fee. Free 15 day trials at: goblinworks.com/download/
Ozem's Vigil: The largest force for Holy Justice in the River Kingdoms.
Are You Ready to Smite Evil?
ozemsvigil.guildlaunch.com
Honestly being nice just admit the devs are in over their heads call it a learning experience and pull the plug...
There were times when the games were released when they were actually finished and ready for release. Today it is not anymore so.
There is nothing wrong with PFO. It is simply unfinished game. And judging from my free trial, it will need at least 1-2 year of hard work to actually be a game ready for release.
I am not in habit of playing a game for 2 years before its released. Or 2 years beta testing , people used to get pay for that - not pay subscription to beta test unfinished game for 2 years.
Who ever thought of that is out of his mind.
So, nothing is wrong with PFO game. I am sure it will be good, once its released in 2 years.
But please stop being greedy asking people to pay to beta test the game.
The crusaders, evangelists and missionaries will say that "you are not paying to beta test the game, you are paying for the experience points and the privilege to build the game and the community that the Open Enrollment players will step into".
The problem with that is the contradictions and the pipe dream aspect of it.
1. Contradiction: Goblin Works is incapable to recognize or unwilling to admit that veteran players will have a big advantage over new players, especially the longer this EE process goes.
2. Contradiction: Since anyone can now request a free trial, and then choose to resub and play, that my friends is Open Enrollment. To say it is not open enrollment is a contradiction of the reality that iit is, only possible difference is the lack of advertisement.
3. Pipe Dream: In two years time (because GW keeps on saying they are in year 2 or 3 of a 5 year development process) the soon to be obsolete UNity 4 engine pushed to its limits will be able to compete with more advanced engines.
When your starting point is 3 miles behind the rest of the racers, and you quite frankly move slower then most of them, you will never catch up.
4, Pipe Dream: That PFO will shift from EE to OE, opening the door for new players into a world that is well populated, vibrant and innovative or unique.
They did not strike the iron when it was hot, PFO was released into alpha / beta / ee far too early with silly word smithing gimmicks, and terrible business model (roundly rejected by virtually all) and a vision that did not appeal to the Pathfinder community or the MMO community in sustainable numbers.
Is there some enjoyment in playing the game with friends? Of course there is, but not because of the game, but because of the friends.
Played: E&B, SWG, Eve, WoW, COH, WAR, POTBS, AOC, LOTRO, AUTO.A, AO, FE, TR, WWII, MWO, TSW, SWTOR, GW2, NWO, WoP, RUST, LIF, SOA, MORTAL, DFUW, AA, TF, PFO, ALBO, and many many others....
Nope, because you don't get more power the more you give money, it's just a sub.
PFO is clearly on my list for a long time already.
I aint knew its already good to go and have a look.
Well then, lets have a look
..
By all means, give it a look. The new player experience is quite good, for the trial period and if you hang around the starter area or join a company / settlement that is active.
The "roll into rate" from Free Trial to Subscription is the challenge for PFO.
Played: E&B, SWG, Eve, WoW, COH, WAR, POTBS, AOC, LOTRO, AUTO.A, AO, FE, TR, WWII, MWO, TSW, SWTOR, GW2, NWO, WoP, RUST, LIF, SOA, MORTAL, DFUW, AA, TF, PFO, ALBO, and many many others....
Yesterday I was asked via PM on the Paizo forums, what my impressions are of Albion Online?
I thought my response would be appropriate here as well, for several reasons:
First, like PFO, Albion Online is a game that is currently in early to mid stages of Alpha and it is being developed by a small team with a less than AAA budget.
Secondly, Albion is being portrayed as an Open World, PVP focused, Sandbox MMORPG and again much in the same way that PFO is.
Thirdly, the "end game" goal of both games is that guilds will compete for territorial control, with settlement sieges being the pinnacle event of the PVP (GvG) content.
Finally, both are fantasy based (although Albion is more of a Medieval fantasy - no Elves, Dwarves, Orcs or Goblins).
My PM to the inquisitive person (who shall remain nameless for his own protection, because the PFO community fanboys will not receive his questioning well).
Pros:
1. It has zoned PVP: Green = Safe (tiers 1-3); Yellow = Partial Loot (Tiers 4 - 5); Red = Full Loot (Tiers 6 and 7).
Even in the Yellow and Red Zone, you still have to declare yourself "Hostile" and you won;t be able to attack unless you do so. Once you declare, a number of Hostiles in the zone will go up by +1. So you can tell how many "Hostiles" in a zone when you first enter or remain there.
2. There is territorial control; player built settlements; GvG and AvA PVP; Player settlements can be captured and or destroyed.
3. After watching a very brief video, the game mechanics are very simple. The in-game tutorial is good enough to get you started, and takes about 5 minutes.
4. The game is solo friendly up to about Tier 4, but if you want to have access to tiers 5-7, probably need a group to travel more safely.
5. It is a PVP based game, and it is designed that way. No penalty for PVPing, unless you lose. No such thing as griefing, the expectation is, if you enter a PVP zone you are fair game.
6. Crafting - Gathering systems is are top notch; integrated in a way that makes sense; and self sufficient up to at least Tier 4.
Bottom Line, it is EVE with Swords!!
Cons:
1. The server just broke the 6000+ population mark, and they are having some lag and memory leak issues. This is however only alpha, and the largest population to stress the system thus far.
2. Not enough character detail can be seen. It is that stylized cartoonish look anyway, but it would be nice to be able to zoom in a bit closer.
3. Click to move is a bit of need in getting used to, but anyone with experience with top-down scrollers (ie Diablo) won't have an issue.
Summary - Comparison:
Albion is well worth the $49.99 price tag to get into the Alpha Testing (which will last for a few weeks).
The game plays more like a beta ready to release in 2 - 3 months, more so than a game that has had only one other major alpha phase.
Albion is made by a small team, with far less than what PFO had in KS money, and has an equal or less time of development. That is by far the most damning thing I can say as a comparison.
Goblin Works and specifically Ryan, is spending far too much time, money and game mechanics in limiting what players can do, instead of creating things for the players to do while playing game.
[A slight edit from the original in the last line]
I would add that Albion Online is being developed on a game engine that has potential growth, whereas PFO is using the soon to be obsolete Unity 4 engine.
Albion Online is also following the business model of F2P, which I understand some like it and others do not, but in the comparison F2P generates more revenue.
Played: E&B, SWG, Eve, WoW, COH, WAR, POTBS, AOC, LOTRO, AUTO.A, AO, FE, TR, WWII, MWO, TSW, SWTOR, GW2, NWO, WoP, RUST, LIF, SOA, MORTAL, DFUW, AA, TF, PFO, ALBO, and many many others....