Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
"....Pathfinder will be to EVE what WoW was to EQ"
corpusc
Member UncommonPosts: 1,341
that abbreviated quote seems to be something i'd imagine alot of MMO'ers would be interested to hear.
alot of good answers by the main PFO mouthpiece, to things players are asking here:
---------------------------
Corpus Callosum
---------------------------
Comments
So this game will be exacly like EvE but with pandas? Oh man cant wait to fire my panda missiles at that station.
A lot of talk
Lets wait they can back it up
"It has potential"
-Second most used phrase on existence
"It sucks"
-Most used phrase on existence
I dont believe a word of it... and im really partial to the game.
Nothing good ever came out of the DnD/wizards licenses (with the exception of Bioware titles).
Full quote and direct link to the post:
"In my perfect world, Pathfinder Online will be to EVE Online what World of Warcraft was to EverQuest. That is, the game that came after the game that solved a lot of hard problems but left a path for development towards accessibility and fun.
As someone who not only played through the transition from EQ to WoW, but spent countless hours doing analysis of both games from a business perspective, I have a tremendous appreciation for what Blizzard accomplished. They did not make a "clone", they made an evolutionary step that changed the way people interacted with theme park MMO content.
I think there's an opportunity to do something similar for sand box MMOs too." - Ryan Scott Dancey
Link: http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz4smt?What-is-the-target-market-for-PFO#12
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
wasn't a fanboy post. i fully expect every MMO to be failures on at least one level, if not very many different levels.
unless they announce real life skills based action combat, anything else they might do right will be personally irrelevant as i refuse to do more than brief exploration in traditional combat based MMOs. and i think its very unlikely they will change up the combat much when its based on a P&P IP.
but that quote sounds like they are aiming to do what a high percentage of the posters in this forum are wanting. figured it'd be interesting to see what kind of response it gets, with wider exposure.
---------------------------
Corpus Callosum
---------------------------
It's actually the opposite, as many of the sandbox advocates here want to make the games more complex and difficult, whereas Ryan's focus is on making it more accessible. I think he's on the right track, and if there's someone that has the knowledge and experience to pull it off, it's Ryan.
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
"Also, the HeroEngine that is in Star Wars was so heavily modded by Bioware that it is now incompatible with the HeroEngine code distributed to new users. The current version of HeroEngine and the Star Wars code are now on divergent development tracks."
Figured so. HeroEngine is in a very good track right now, I follow them on youtube and on twitter and they've added many things. I hope this turns out good.
"6: The only people who are likely to really want do it are the same people who you probably find annoying elsewhere in the game system. Giving those kinds of people fewer things to keep them interested in the game may get them to quit sooner and go to some other venue that better caters to their little miserable hearts full of sociopathy."
I will try this game for this sentance alone.
"As a foulness ya shall know them."
@paterah
i think you posted in the wrong thread. 8)
---------------------------
Corpus Callosum
---------------------------
That's a quote from Ryan Dancey on the Paizo forums regarding Pathfinder Online and what engine they will use, looks like there considering the Hero engine.
"It would be awesome if you could duel your companion. Then you could solo pvp".--Thanes
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
It's obvious he's spent a long time thinking about this - but imo that whole nugget of information is trying to condense all that thinking into way too small an explanation.
Pathfinder or Sandbox or just mmorpgs... need to do/advance/innovate 2 things:
1) World Interactions - destructive/constructive environments
2) Social Interactions - player interactions and social organization -> main gameplay
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
You won't get an explanation - mainly because he can't back that up. The engine is quite robust. Having seen what it could do in early iterations (like in HJ) to what it can do now (in Dominus for instance) it definately doesn't
This sounds like it's going to be worth following though!
Well, simplifying sandbox MMO's and removing everything that makes them unique, challenging and special probably will make them appeal to the masses more than they have so far.
But look how it 'well' it turned out with WOW, we now get the same style of gameplay thrown at us over and over with no thought or originality in that arm of genre.
Not what I'm interested in at all. I'd rather see the sandbox market saturated with 5 good titles with about 300-500K subs each, the mass market be damned.
So I'd have to say that so far I hope the folks creating PO fail at their endevour.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
My name is RefMinor and I endorse this remark.Agreed with both of above.
I'm not sure that this game will be "anything" to EVE due to it, once again, being another fantasy MMO.
I always invisioned the ultimate sandbox to be similar to SWG but done well. Perhaps maybe using an engine similar to the infinity engine. Will real time combat like freelancer, the ability to dock in stations and get out, the ability to land on planets and asteroids with an intricate ground based game. So it would essentially be two games in one. Free roaming space sandbox and classless skill based ground sandbox.
"Don't mistake a fun game for a good game... Checkers is fun to play but its not exactly the highest point of gaming design... and definatly not worth $60 plus $15 a month"
I like the way Ryan thinks... he gets it and obviosuly knows his player base.
Thank god they are not trying to sell this game necesarily to the DF/ MO crowd.
Actually I don't see it that way at all. Complexity and difficulty are not dirty words, and considering the current generation of games seems to completely lack either, this is entirely refreshing. Adding accessibility to a sandbox virtual world means removing all the bits that make it such --turning it into a themepark. That is clearly not his intent, in fact if you look at the rest of his comment, I think he makes it quite plain, and it doesn't sound like making it more accessible. He's pitching this to a very specific audience, and it ain't the themepark crowd.
"To answer the original question, my goal is to attract people who value the idea of an open world, persistent sandbox where the primary drivers of the experience are other players and their interactions. This is not going to be a game that has a big focus on solo play - although there will certainly be ways to play the game as a Lone Wolf. This is not going to be a game where the objective is to gear up the "perfect" party to solve a theme park puzzle - you'll have specialized characters aplenty, but no "best" option for being an adventurer.
I want to give players a rich set of tools and allow them to creatively use them to create a sword & sorcery world of exploration, development, adventure, and domination. And that's the audience I'm hoping to attract." - Ryan Dancy (CEO, Goblinworks)
Yet again I must remind though, that once upon a time, MMORPGs did not have multi-million subscribers, and 200,000 to 300,000 subscribers was considered a smash success, and they were profitable enough. If the development is managed wisely and shreudly, Pathfinder could easily generate a profit with such subscription levels. The gaming media and other such snobs would never label it as a success, but to hell with them.
That's what's wrong with the MMO universe these days, all these EVE clones...
Sorry ya'll, too obvious.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
They can still accomplish that while making the game more accessible. A game can be accessible and have depth. It can be accessible and still be a strategic or engaging game.
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
I liked the older EQ, before it started to change and become too instanced, and I found that WoW was just what I disliked on steriods, so no....That quote doesn't fill me with hope.
Tell me it will be a suped up UO or something, and you got my attention.
I don't agree with #1 at all... unless you're talking about players building their own settlements. Actually destroying the environment isn't all that important.
On the other hand, #2 is the most important thing that can be done to improve MMOs. When you're making a game centered around a social activity (a multiplayer game) the more you can do to foster more/better activity will go a long way.
this game started development last year <.< i think its too early to call it anything but i would 100% try it when it comes out