It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Originally posted by BlackUhuru That little red box is actually very large, when the game launches they will only allow 4.5k players each month. As more people are allowed in and spread out they will introduce more of the world as needed. Pathfinder onlines game launch will be unlike anything we have seen before! Starting out with only 4.5k players on day one and introducing 4.5k players every month there after. I'm on my iPhone so it's hard for me to type out a full description of there plans for launch but I recommend going to the message boards on the Paizo website and read up on it, very interesting game design and launch philosophy.
So capping at at about 18k playerbase total....Dont see many more then that playing that style of game.
"It would be awesome if you could duel your companion. Then you could solo pvp".--Thanes
Originally posted by Royalkin A player-driven economy is fine. A player driven economy as the center of your game-design is a bad idea, or at least for me its a bad idea because I don't enjoy playing the market. Ok, thats fine. Your entitled to your opinion and preferences. EvE is a perfect example of this, there is not an aspect in the game world that does not revolve around money and the economy. Yes, this is because the vast majority of items in the game are produced by players, which is a player-driven economy, which is a consequence of it being a sandobx. You cannot have a player-driven economy without it affecting the game in a large way. I don't see a way to have both a player-driven economy, and not have it be a large part of the game. Its just another disguised progression system, it doesn't really solve anything of what you say in your second paragraph. Yes your character can progress by just paying for the subscription and queing skills, but if you don't GRIND for money, you will be effectively completely useless even with LVL5 skills. You are just substituting one kind of grind for another kinf of grind. This might be a question of perspective, but for me its the same thing. Grind will never be eliminated, it is very much a relative thing from person to person. Where I have a disdain for grinding experience, you seem to have a disdain for grinding to earn in-game currency. Both are relative perceptions and preferences, and there is nothing wrong with that. A sandbox can certainly have player based economy, its fine really, but we need to remember that these are games, they do not need to necessarily follow the free-market economy in real life. There is nothing saying that the economy must be the driving factor of a sandbox, in fact, a free-market economy simulation in a MMO brings the exact same problems with itself like it does in real life. Once again, how can you have a player-driven economy and not have it be a large part of the game? Its actually one of the things i think why sandboxes are not as popular, because the economical libertarian model is by its very -definition- concerned about individual wealth and not the collective, it is therefore, essentially, anti-social. Which is a bad thing for an MMO. I sincerely mean no disrespect here, but it sounds like you have a problem with capitalism. Eve's model is a replication of real world economics, but also in that you get a return on effort. If you want to be wealthy, you have to earn it, there is no one there who is going to give you a handout. There should be a guarantee of equal opportunity, but not of equal results. If the collective mentality prevailed, everyone would be equal, and there would therefore be no incentive for anyone to achieve anything, because by doing so, whatever 'extra' could be earned would be taken and given to another in order to enforce the collective. PS: Because this might be misunderstood: economy and combat are not the only parts of a game, especially an MMO, focusing on either is a big mistake. What I am advocating is interdependant game design. Sandbox game design is dependent on player actions, and because of this these player actions involve the economy and pvp. If you remove those elements the world isn't persistent, nor is it virtual. It would simply be a set of static content that players run-through, i.e. a themepark. This is very off-topic, my bad.
very well thought out though, and I agree that the poster you were responding to seems to have more of a problem with Capitalism than the game itself.
Currently bored with MMO's.
just subscribed to the newsletter, let's hope it works and also hope that the "easy game lovers" avoid it.
just a question, is this full 3d? or like UO graphics (2.5D) or???
So What Now?
Originally posted by TweFoju just a question, is this full 3d? or like UO graphics (2.5D) or???
As far as I know, it's full 3D, as for the art style no one knows. There are no screenshots, nor has there been anything posted on the art style. I doubt they will go full realism though, my guess is something similar to Guild Wars' style.
Mostly agreed with AdamTM here. EVE economic system is rather unappealing. It's good when you're trying to simulate a cutthroat winner-take-all world, which is what EVE is about, but otherwise it's a pretty underwhelming system for anyone who just wants to get something done.
From what I've seen on the blogs, Pathfinder can do more interesting stuff, especially with the strict contract systems and stuff.