Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

PFO rated #2 "Most Disappointing" game of 2015

2»

Comments

  • IkedaIkeda Member RarePosts: 2,744
    Originally posted by Slapshot1188

     

    I think PFO is at the top (bottom?) of the hill because it combines the sub with a NO WIPE promise in a FFA PvP game with looting based around territory control where you gain fixed XP over time.  

     

    Every single one of these things is a BAD thing.  And you hold them up like an accomplishment.

     

    1)  No wipe.  Even after bugs are found.   Look at how the glitches doomed Neverwinter.

    2)  FFA PvP.  Except when spelled out.  But griefing is accepted as a viable strategy by the CEO

    3)  Territory is for larger guilds.  What if you're in a purposely small guild?  Screwed.

    4)  Along with 3.  XP fixed over time means that if you weren't subbed from the get go you can't catch up.  It may not be TRUE but it also holds people back from joining games like Eve.  They PERCIEVE they're behind the curve.

  • DistopiaDistopia Member EpicPosts: 21,182
    Originally posted by F0URTWENTY
    Originally posted by reeereee
    Originally posted by F0URTWENTY
    Originally posted by Distopia
    Originally posted by Ikeda

    Yea, except the moment they charged per month... their game is launched.  You're on the clock and owing something to your consumers.

    Alpha " In this phase, developers generally test the software using white-box techniques. Additional validation is then performed using black-box or gray-box techniques, by another testing team. Moving to black-box testing inside the organization is known as alpha release"

     

    Well I guess it's time to review shroud of the avatar and many other Steam EA games, like ARK etc... They're all charging for their alphas. Many of those have been at it far longer than PFO. Yet they're still in "alpha"...

     

    Those games charge box fees just as pathfinder does and most people don't have much of a problem with that.

    The difference is pathfinder will cost you 180$/year.

    Rust and H1z1 are being actively developed and not costing me a thing.

    Ah, so your position is that an Alpha game with a cash shop is perfectly fine but an alpha game with a subscription is not.

    Pathfinder charges a box fee, sub fee, and has a cash shop for the pitiful state its in. You can't compare it to other early access games, none are as incomplete or cost anywhere near as much. 

    There would be something seriously wrong with games like Dayz, Rust, Ark, etc.. charging a subscription fee...

    That is Pathfinders business plan, just as a box fee is any of those other games business plan. IN short all of those games are taking advantage of running with their business plan, while still being considered alpha products by their studios...

    Bill has also gone on record as saying once you're charging.. you're released in his eyes... he's said that about mere cash-shops with F2P games. In other words, games you don't have to pay a dime for.  What's good enough for the goose is good enough for the gander as they say... otherwise it just looks like a selective public lynching.

     

     

     

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson


  • TalonsinTalonsin Member EpicPosts: 3,619
    Originally posted by reeereee
    What game in alpha wouldn't be a "disappointing mess" when compared to actual finished games?  Now sure they're charging a  subscription fee to play alpha, but that's a different issue.

    The CEO of Goblinworks has stated PO is NOT in an alpha state, it is a complete game.  Are you saying the CEO in charge of the game is wrong?

    "Sean (Murray) saying MP will be in the game is not remotely close to evidence that at the point of purchase people thought there was MP in the game."  - SEANMCAD

  • TalonsinTalonsin Member EpicPosts: 3,619
    Originally posted by Distopia
    Originally posted by Ikeda

    Yea, except the moment they charged per month... their game is launched.  You're on the clock and owing something to your consumers.

    Alpha " In this phase, developers generally test the software using white-box techniques. Additional validation is then performed using black-box or gray-box techniques, by another testing team. Moving to black-box testing inside the organization is known as alpha release"

     

    Well I guess it's time to review shroud of the avatar and many other Steam EA games, like ARK etc... They're all charging for their alphas. Many of those have been at it far longer than PFO. Yet they're still in "alpha"...

    The game was reviewed due to the CEO coming here and stating that the game is NOT in any kind of testing state and is a complete game.  If those other games you mentioned are claiming they are "complete" then they should be reviewed.  Luckily they are hiding behind early access/alpha/beta testing state.

    "Sean (Murray) saying MP will be in the game is not remotely close to evidence that at the point of purchase people thought there was MP in the game."  - SEANMCAD

  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 19,519

    I can understand not liking a revenue model or a feature set. This game isn't for me. I don't like open pvp, full loot, territory control, etc. I don't like mandatory subscriptions either. So, I'm not going to buy or play it. It's that simple. If you don't like how they're doing things don't buy in. Play another game.

    What I don't understand are people who don't like a game that feel the need to run a vendetta against it. They need to exert some weird fascist control over what others do. No one should support kickstarter games, early access, pay for alpha/beta access, play games that install from a platform, and the list goes on. Those people should let it go.

    take back the hobby: https://www.reddit.com/r/patientgamers/

    traveller, interloper, anomaly
    ༼ つ ◕◕ ༽つ

  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 19,519
    Originally posted by Talonsin
    Originally posted by reeereee
    What game in alpha wouldn't be a "disappointing mess" when compared to actual finished games?  Now sure they're charging a  subscription fee to play alpha, but that's a different issue.

    The CEO of Goblinworks has stated PO is NOT in an alpha state, it is a complete game.  Are you saying the CEO in charge of the game is wrong?

    Nice selective reference. He said the game is complete, but it's not finished.

    take back the hobby: https://www.reddit.com/r/patientgamers/

    traveller, interloper, anomaly
    ༼ つ ◕◕ ༽つ

  • jaxomejaxome Member UncommonPosts: 76
    Originally posted by Torval
    Originally posted by Talonsin
    Originally posted by reeereee
    What game in alpha wouldn't be a "disappointing mess" when compared to actual finished games?  Now sure they're charging a  subscription fee to play alpha, but that's a different issue.

    The CEO of Goblinworks has stated PO is NOT in an alpha state, it is a complete game.  Are you saying the CEO in charge of the game is wrong?

    Nice selective reference. He said the game is complete, but it's not finished.

    If I understand correctly it will never be finished because it is an mmo and mmorpgs evolve over time, he said it was min viable product, that it was ready for players and reviews... It is not an alpha state game, it is the game absent bells and whistles, it has been released lol and it is more or less crap

  • TokkenTokken Member RarePosts: 2,164


    Originally posted by Bigdaddyx
    I almost..almost payed money to try this game and i am glad that i did not.

    +1 Thank you!

    Make PvE GREAT Again!
  • DistopiaDistopia Member EpicPosts: 21,182
    Originally posted by Talonsin
    Originally posted by Distopia
    Originally posted by Ikeda

    Yea, except the moment they charged per month... their game is launched.  You're on the clock and owing something to your consumers.

    Alpha " In this phase, developers generally test the software using white-box techniques. Additional validation is then performed using black-box or gray-box techniques, by another testing team. Moving to black-box testing inside the organization is known as alpha release"

     

    Well I guess it's time to review shroud of the avatar and many other Steam EA games, like ARK etc... They're all charging for their alphas. Many of those have been at it far longer than PFO. Yet they're still in "alpha"...

    The game was reviewed due to the CEO coming here and stating that the game is NOT in any kind of testing state and is a complete game.  If those other games you mentioned are claiming they are "complete" then they should be reviewed.  Luckily they are hiding behind early access/alpha/beta testing state.

    I was referring to the idea of charging money, in reply to what Ikeda said... which even Bill has said he views any game as released that is charging money, so reviewing those other games would fit the bill.

    Doesn't GW consider it to still be in a early access state BTW? My understanding of what he was saying was it's core features are in place, there's nothing missing in that regard, that doesn't mean they don't have a ton of things to work out. My guess was he was referring to major features being in place, guild systems, combat, building, and crafting. OR what ever other features that entails. I don't play the game nor have any interest to do so.

    I just feel it would be fair to treat all EA games the same as...IMO it was reviewed because people raised a stink about it. In other words to please their own crowd here on MMORPG.com.

     

     

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson


  • H0urg1assH0urg1ass Member EpicPosts: 2,228

    I didn't realize that 2015 was over.

    While not the best game so far, I'll be reserving rankings for sometime in January 2016.

  • AudoucetAudoucet Member UncommonPosts: 69

    Four possibilities :

    Fee access, no subscription, wipe at launch. <= Certainly not an Alpha, but clearly a Beta. It's just a preorder, with beta access as a perk. SoA, The Repopulation.

    Subscription, wipe at launch. Not Alpha either, it's Beta. It's a paid Beta, which is in my opinion absolutely wrong and should be condemned. But it's a Beta anyway.

    Fee access, no wipe. Well, It's a complete game all right. But it won't be costing you any more money, should you play or not play.

    Subscription, no wipe. Complete game, and as long as you want to play, you must pay. Each time you want to try it again to see If it changed, you must pay again. The game is obviously launched.

    PFO would even fit a fifth category, the one in which each month you don't pay to be subscribed, you're pushed back in terms of raw power. 

  • goboygogoboygo Member RarePosts: 2,040
    Originally posted by Distopia

     

    There would be something seriously wrong with games like Dayz, Rust, Ark, etc.. charging a subscription fee...

     

     

    Why would multiplayer games charge a sub.  Should "Call of duty" charge a sub?

    This is single world persistent MMO, which can and do charge subs.  How could you even make that comparison.

  • GinazGinaz Member RarePosts: 2,187
    Originally posted by Distopia

    Bill has also gone on record as saying once you're charging.. you're released in his eyes... he's said that about mere cash-shops with F2P games. In other words, games you don't have to pay a dime for.  What's good enough for the goose is good enough for the gander as they say... otherwise it just looks like a selective public lynching.

     

     

     

    Actually, he said if they're charging a fee AND there will be no more character wipes, then that's when he considers a game released.

    Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?

    Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.

  • GinazGinaz Member RarePosts: 2,187
    Originally posted by h0urg1ass

    I didn't realize that 2015 was over.

    While not the best game so far, I'll be reserving rankings for sometime in January 2016.

    Did you not click the link to the article in the OP's first post?  The article title is "The List: The Top 5 Most Disappointing MMOs of 2015…So Far".  Note the words at the end.  So Far.image

     

    Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?

    Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.

  • WizardryWizardry Member LegendaryPosts: 16,318

    To be disappointing means you had high expectations then were let down.

    Example i had super high expectations for FFXIV but was let down,i had really high expectations for SWTOR but was let down again.

    As to 2015 there is not one single game that i can say i had high expectations for to be let down,so in reality none of them are disappointing,i expected them to be poor quality games and they are.

    The only named game i have not tried was TESO ,so i really have no comment there but again ,i never expected that to be great so even if i got in and it was bad,i can't say i would be disappointed not surprised.

     

    Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Member RarePosts: 14,247
    Interesting. A thread about an MMORPG.com article would normally get locked immediately, with a msg to post in the article conversation. This one goes untouched. 

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • Loke666Loke666 Member EpicPosts: 21,441
    Originally posted by reeereee
    Originally posted by Loke666
    Originally posted by reeereee
    What game in alpha wouldn't be a "disappointing mess" when compared to actual finished games?  Now sure they're charging a  subscription fee to play alpha, but that's a different issue.

    No, it is not. When you charge people for playing the game opens itself for reviews and stuff like this. 

    Except it's not 2004 anymore.

    No game I can think of 2004 charged a monthly fee and admitted the game were nowhere near ready for launch.

    In fact, FFXIV were deemed to be not in good enough shape after the launch and stopped all monthly fees until it was, that took 2 years or so.

    No other game have done this so it is not a matter of being with the times, this would be bad in 2004 and it is bad now.

    That all doesn't mean Pathfinder can't be a great game once it actually becomes ready (it certainly have potential) but anything you charge for is open for reviews both now and 2004. In fact it was the same back in 1996 as well.

  • Raven322Raven322 Member UncommonPosts: 68
    Originally posted by Slapshot1188

    Summary: 

    And at the end of the day, Pathfinder is just a disappointing mess in its current state. 

     

    http://www.mmorpg.com/showFeature.cfm/feature/9926/The-List-The-Top-5-Most-Disappointing-MMOs-of-2015So-Far.html

     

     

    Ouch.

    #1 is World of Warcraft.

    I think they'll get over this. Kind of how you aren't getting over your hatred of all things PO :)

This discussion has been closed.