Howdy, Stranger!

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

Since the game is "released", are the items bought in Kickstarter 2.5 years ago in game?

13

Comments

  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] UncommonPosts: 0
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • thunderclesthundercles Member UncommonPosts: 510
    Thanks for clarification. If you're enjoying the game that's awesome! I think a definitive statement from the lead developer about the status of the game and what are some fair expectations would be helpful. Using FAQ and statements from years and months ago is not a great resource. So far it seems like some people feel like Ryan has stated that the game is finished and released and some people believe it still in testing. it would probably be best if they just pick a side and say that they're in testing or they have released. The grey area early enrollment is going to lead to a lot of customers being disappointed or frustrated with paying a finished product price and getting early enrollment product.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] UncommonPosts: 0
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • thunderclesthundercles Member UncommonPosts: 510
    We are not really in a "testing period". Our Alpha Test ended and we are now in Early Enrollment, which is live operations. The game is now persistent and there won't be any resets.


    With statements like this it doesn't seem like Ryan thinks that it not in testing anymore. Which is why we need more up to date info. I understand what you are saying but some official statements saying the same would be nice. Maybe they made statements in the psst but they ate getting some bad press now and could use some clarification to save face.
  • CrazKanukCrazKanuk Member EpicPosts: 6,130
    Originally posted by caldeathe

    I think Ryan has actually made repeated unequivocal statements about what Goblinworks thinks the state of the game is. The problem is it doesn't fit well into the majority of people's expectations, so a lot of people are simply not inclined to accept his answer. They (goblinworks) continue to say the game isn't in final release, but is in an unfinished, early-release state.

    The game is not ready for the average player, and will not be ready for the average player for months. People can play now, if they want, but they will be paying to play an unfinished game. That can be both rewarding and frustrating, sometimes at the same time.

    Added to that, the training system is building toward incredibly rich and complex, and diving in without a guide or a willingness to experiment is going to be painful.

    Soooooooo, GW's marketing department basically came up with the Early Enrolment term as a way to charge people during their testing phase without any of that backlash from people not wanting to "pay to test your software for you" 

    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
    ----------------

  • ThodThod Member UncommonPosts: 14

    Ryan should never have dropped the term beta. Calling it Early Enrollment - coupled with the fact they opened (had to) the doors to the public as the numbers are lower as planned is the reason a 'beta' is suddenly a 'released' game.

    This is disengenious as renaming it and opening the doors to people who missed the KS can't miraciously time travel you 1 1/2 years in development.

    The original plan:

    Alpha launch 1Q 2014, beta (paid) 6/2014, 1 month pre Open Enrollment 1/2016 - Release 1 month later

    Actual timelines and name changes

    Alpha start June 26 2014, Early Enrollment December 31 2014 - Head Start Access April first (no joke) 2015 - no mention of any official release any more

    Edit: Actually alpha was planned as a closed alpha - they then opened up alpha to a few selected additional players starting August (free of charge - settlement leaders and invites from existing alpha customers) with opening it up early October to everyone with beta access (free of charge) to test band-width.

    The result wasn't good - so the start of Early enrollment was postponed several times from end of October to finally end of December (dates from memory)

    end edit

    Neither Ryan nor GW has yet invented time travel. To me as a backer who has been aware what happens all I can complain is a half year delay - which isn't that unusual for KS projects. And for me it still is a paid beta (exactly what I signed up for during the KS).

    I thought I copy the following bit from GW (November 2012) as this best describes where we are in the process and what to expect.

     

    Why is it Paid?

    The biggest reason the Beta is paid is that it is a real running MMO. We have bandwidth costs, server costs, a customer support team, and live operations to keep the servers online. We are running the Early Access period exactly the same way the final game will be run after Release, just on a smaller scale.

    We will have customer support reps so that if you have a problem with billing or some sort of in-game bug is preventing progress with your character, you will have a real live person to contact. We will probably run with email support as the first line, and do phone conversations only as required to resolve issues.

    We'll also be operating with a focus on data integrity and the most important aspect of this is our backup procedures. We'll have a full normal backup system running with multiple live database servers, and offsite backup at least once a day. In the event of a catastrophic data-eating bug, we will endeavor to roll back at most a single day worth of progress, and we hope to avoid even that. Managing that infrastructure has a substantial overhead cost.

    Our data bandwidth costs will probably be higher during Beta while the game patches are large. When we make a major patch, every person who plays the game has to download the patch and as the player population grows, the cost to do those patches grows too.

    Because the game design will be evolving during Early Access Beta, we don't feel it is appropriate to monetize through micro-transactions. We will require anyone participating in Beta to be a subscriber. After Release, we plan to roll out a hybrid microtransaction/subscription model. It will be easier to tune that model and make sure it works for all players then.

    Not everyone wants to pay for Beta access while some of the major gameplay systems are still being developed. That is certainly understandable, and we will look forward to having those players with us after Release. Don't feel that Release players will be too far behind players that began playing during Beta. Our wide and flat skill system means those players will be effective in combat in short order and ready to contribute to settlements immediately.

    If you choose to join us for Early Access Beta, we will make sure that you have a great time! A lot of the game systems will be implemented around you, and you'll be able to see them evolve and change to meet your needs. More importantly, we'll be paying lots of attention to your feedback and trying to make a game that facilitates your gameplay style - whatever that is.

    Early Access Beta requires a leap of faith for both the community and Goblinworks. But this is how Pathfinder has always been developed -- in collaboration with the fans. We're excited to be part of that tradition. See you online!

  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,049
    Thanks Thod. Thats why I always appreciate your GW/Paizo posts. Instead of complaining about a poster you actually addressed the concerns. I still feel that GW has totally mucked this up with Alpha, Beta, Early Entry Beta, Early Enrollment, Open Enrollment but I can niw understand your point (agree or not).

    GW should designate you as their official ambassador. These other guys don't understand the damage they are doing to their own game.

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

    My ignore list finally has one occupant after 12 years. I am the strongest supporter of free speech on here, but free speech does not mean forced listening. Have fun my friend. Hope you find a new stalking target.

  • BringsliteBringslite Member UncommonPosts: 75
    Originally posted by Slapshot1188
    Thanks Thod. Thats why I always appreciate your GW/Paizo posts. Instead of complaining about a poster you actually addressed the concerns. I still feel that GW has totally mucked this up with Alpha, Beta, Early Entry Beta, Early Enrollment, Open Enrollment but I can niw understand your point (agree or not). GW should designate you as their official ambassador. These other guys don't understand the damage they are doing to their own game.

    I like Thod too. I like most of his posts.

     

    Nothing that he quoted up there is new information., however. In fact, even his layout of the journey to this point looks spot on AND is not a new revelation. You, Slapshot, seem to have been around enough to see all of this stuff. Actually, I believe that you have read this stuff before. I also believe that you can comprehend what you read. It just doesn't match what you pictured when you read it .... before, right? Your expectations  and mental imagery do not match what has been delivered so far?

     

    That's understandable.. What is puzzling is your delivery. Actually, the delivery of many of the posters here (not just you). A good part of what you (and not you only) are throwing up here is incorrect, slanderous, and/or misleading.  No one expects you to praise something that you don't like. No one has the right to tell you not to offer an opinion, either. Carry on. Fire away. At least try and be factual and truthful in what you post. If you won't do that, it just looks like an anger filled agenda. The sheer number of your posts "against" GW (Ryan Dancey, procedure, delivery,  or whatever...) AND your obfuscating and misleading comments suggest that you are compelled or driven to do more than give an unfavorable opinion.

     

    I am not so delusional that I think I can change anyone's opinion, but let a Fan Boi get in a few  statements. Rather than lumping all of us together, take a look (a real look). I am going to try and hit the real issues instead of being sidetracked by all the  rest of the useless stuff:

    1. The game is actually released vs No it's not released:: When GW started fooling around with the established industry's terminology, I feel like they were asking for some pain. Those who have been following for a year or more, are more comfortable (in general) with GW's "wordage" than those  that heve not been following the project..When gamers see a "box" fee and a sub fee, they want to see a game that is much more polished than PfO is right now. They obviously do not agree with this approach. Another debated move was the use of the term "Guild" during the Land Rush. Not enough time to go over why that was unfortunate and still has some repercussions even now...

    Both sides  of this are equally correct and incorrect. If it is your project, you can call it's phases whatever you like. To avoid confusion, you should not switch it around much after your first definitions are published. Gamers (in general) are used to a tradition of MMO development phases. It is a long tradition and those expectations are not easily altered.

    ...which leads to...

    2. Ready for review vs not ready. This site (at least) has it's benchmarks for when a game is considered ready for review. That's it . PfO meets those markers. Commence review.  It was alluded that attention was drawn (by people that do not like PfO, GW, Dancey, or something) because of debate here, and that there may not have been a review yet if not for this. Does not matter. When the conditions are met, the show must go on. I disagree with anyone that says it is unfair to review PfO at this time.

    finally...

    3. They should not charge to play yet vs yes they should: From the very beginning, everyone involved knew that this phase would require a subscription. I knew it was coming. It did not come as a surprise. There was no deception of any kind. GW (and actual players) have been all over these threads warning the public that it is not finished, polished, or free of frustrating things. If you require AAA content, please wait a bit before jumping in. If you want to see a game grow from a vantage "on the inside" and to  have a voice as things grow and are added, if you want the head start feeling of being among the first in a new world and being a part of how it "gels" into something ready for many more (hopefully)... if you see value in being a "legend" in a game with great ideas and potential, YOU WILL FIND VALUE FOR YOUR DOLLAR herein. :) 

    So, I don't see that all of the "fan bois" saying all of the same things about "reviews", "phase terminology", "It is worth a sub from any point of view", "yada, yada"

    How are we "fan bois" damaging the game by coming here to debate false statements?

    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

  • Pratt2112Pratt2112 Member UncommonPosts: 1,636
    Originally posted by Jalitan
    Originally posted by Rusque

    I haven't been following this game, also not particularly interested one way or another, but good lord anyone who is capable of defending this nonsense is truly a part of the problem.

    What does it take to be a released product these days? Keeping something in a perpetual state of "yet to be released" status is kind of criminal. Why ever announce release then? There's no benefit to "going live" if it means you owe something more to your customers. Just keep it "unreleased" and collecting money and somehow you're shielded from everything? wtf?

    People put up with the most insane crap from game developers, I don't get it. Are you so emotionally invested in these products that you can't think clearly?

    ^this

     

    As gamers we can't keep complaining about crap games being released and then defend the developers doing it. Don't fall for the corporate legal speak designed to make you believe what they want.

    The problem is, people are only angered by such behavior when it's happening to a game they don't like, or otherwise aren't following.

    If it's a game they do like, or are following, they'll defend that very same behavior in any way they can... lying, spinning, obfuscating, cherry-picking, etc. etc. 

    I've seen the very same people playing both sides of that coin, simultaneously. Go to forums for a game they don't like, and they're there demonizing every single thing the game and/or dev does. Go to the forums for a game they do like, and they're defending those very same problems.

    If more people would stop being such hypocrites, and start applying the same level of criticism and "outrage" to every project... not just the ones they aren't rooting for personally.... then we might begin to see that kind of change come around.

    Sadly, if the last many years on forums has taught me anything, it's that people get too wound up in "their game", determined to believe that it's doing everything "right", and the devs can do no wrong. It's as though they feel if they admit something is wrong, or poorly done with a game they like, that somehow it reflects on them or something. It's like parents who defend or excuse their child's poor behavior, because to acknowledge it might make them look/feel like a bad parent.

    Screw that. I think if you like a game, you should be even more critical of it, and more vocal with that criticism. You should want the game to do well, and you want the devs to do right by their customers. You should want them to do better. Ignoring, and making excuses for poor choices, design and performance is not how you send that message.

     

  • AudoucetAudoucet Member UncommonPosts: 69
    What's stupid is to try and argue again even though nobody criticised the game since a few day. Caldeath is smart : he continues to advertise the game every day, but without continuing to argue on things which she has no way of proving right. What you just gained is Slapshot will probably answer, along with everyone else, shooting the game down again in the process.
  • AudoucetAudoucet Member UncommonPosts: 69
    Originally posted by Pratt2112
    for the corporate legal speak designed to make you believe what they want.

    The problem is, people are only angered by such behavior when it's happening to a game they don't like, or otherwise aren't following.

    If it's a game they do like, or are following, they'll defend that very same behavior in any way they can... lying, spinning, obfuscating, cherry-picking, etc. etc. 

    I've seen the very same people playing both sides of that coin, simultaneously. Go to forums for a game they don't like, and they're there demonizing every single thing the game and/or dev does. Go to the forums for a game they do like, and they're defending those very same problems.

    If more people would stop being such hypocrites, and start applying the same level of criticism and "outrage" to every project... not just the ones they aren't rooting for personally.... then we might begin to see that kind of change come around.

    Sadly, if the last many years on forums has taught me anything, it's that people get too wound up in "their game", determined to believe that it's doing everything "right", and the devs can do no wrong. It's as though they feel if they admit something is wrong, or poorly done with a game they like, that somehow it reflects on them or something. It's like parents who defend or excuse their child's poor behavior, because to acknowledge it might make them look/feel like a bad parent.

    Screw that. I think if you like a game, you should be even more critical of it, and more vocal with that criticism. You should want the game to do well, and you want the devs to do right by their customers. You should want them to do better. Ignoring, and making excuses for poor choices, design and performance is not how you send that message.

     

    I spent 1600$ on PFO, I don't agree with that.

  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,049
    Originally posted by Pratt2112
     

    Screw that. I think if you like a game, you should be even more critical of it, and more vocal with that criticism. You should want the game to do well, and you want the devs to do right by their customers. You should want them to do better. Ignoring, and making excuses for poor choices, design and performance is not how you send that message.

     

    The echo-chamber of fans has caused FAR more damage to the game than any detractor ever could.  They shouted down all the folks that tried to point out that the plan was wrong.  As a result, the game is in it's current state.  The CEO is chastising his small player base for not recruiting enough for him, people are confused about whether the game is Alpha, Beta, Beta Early Entry, Early Enrollment or Open Enrollment and the game is in a state that Bill said don;t even LOOK at it for a year, but their business plan is apparently failing and they are scrambling for revenue...

     

    None of this should be a surprise for anyone...

     

    If more of them had raised their hands in December and said "This game is nowhere NEAR a condition that you should charge a box fee, sub and cash shop for" maybe, just maybe GW would have reconsidered.  Instead they were so eager to get into a state where their characters wouldn't be wiped that they helped shove the game off the cliff.

     

    So it will be interesting to see when/if they start to deliver all the promised/sold items from the Kickstarter.  I'll check in occasionally to see what's changed.

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

    My ignore list finally has one occupant after 12 years. I am the strongest supporter of free speech on here, but free speech does not mean forced listening. Have fun my friend. Hope you find a new stalking target.

  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,049
    Originally posted by Audoucet
    What's stupid is to try and argue again even though nobody criticised the game since a few day. Caldeath is smart : he continues to advertise the game every day, but without continuing to argue on things which she has no way of proving right. What you just gained is Slapshot will probably answer, along with everyone else, shooting the game down again in the process.

    I would argue that continued posting about supposed positive facets of the game (real or imagined) that receive no response and few views speak for themselves...

     

     

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

    My ignore list finally has one occupant after 12 years. I am the strongest supporter of free speech on here, but free speech does not mean forced listening. Have fun my friend. Hope you find a new stalking target.

  • AudoucetAudoucet Member UncommonPosts: 69
    Originally posted by Slapshot1188
    Originally posted by Audoucet
    What's stupid is to try and argue again even though nobody criticised the game since a few day. Caldeath is smart : he continues to advertise the game every day, but without continuing to argue on things which she has no way of proving right. What you just gained is Slapshot will probably answer, along with everyone else, shooting the game down again in the process.

    I would argue that continued posting about supposed positive facets of the game (real or imagined) that receive no response and few views speak for themselves...

     

     

    Lol, and you should see the French forums... On my usual MMO French community, "Jeux Online", the last post about PFO was in February...

  • MumboJumboMumboJumbo Member UncommonPosts: 3,219

    Some of the problems with EE:-

    • MVP: Where "viable" == Fun Core Game Loop => Combat and Performance at this basic game play quality issue
    • EE payment = cumulative sunk cost eg gym sub where novelty plateaus without the above, people will not be willing to pay.
    • PvP for the IP = bad press issue
    • Crowdfunding: It has to be superlative shaping of the game with players instead of players as testers and paying over the odds/risk to do so.
    • The conventions of mmorpgs with fantasy avatars does not feel fresh which is the bit the devs are struggling to build as foundations to the game currently.
    • The top selling aspect of PFO: They are not currently in the game - the very bits that differentiate it from the rest of the market. That to me is the real issue here.
     
  • EdgeXEdgeX Member UncommonPosts: 39
    Originally posted by Pratt2112

    The problem is, people are only angered by such behavior when it's happening to a game they don't like, or otherwise aren't following.

    If it's a game they do like, or are following, they'll defend that very same behavior in any way they can... lying, spinning, obfuscating, cherry-picking, etc. etc.

    I don't find this to be true at all. I LOVED ArcheAge, the game design I thought was incredible. At the end of the day though, I couldn't support that company or their business model, as much as I loved that game. I would still pay a ton of money for a cash shop free version of ArcheAge (Not run by Trion, they don't get anymore of my money). That was my baby. If anything I'm the opposite, the more I love something, the more it hurts to watch them make stupid decisions, or ruin it. I'm very critical of whatever game I'm playing, as I want that game to be the best game. Pretending that the game is perfect (doesn't exist), doesn't help improve the game at all. Voicing my concerns and problems, probably still won't help, but hey, maybe the right person will see it, or enough people will be saying it, that change will occur.

     

    Maybe it's just because I've been playing MMO's for 15+ years now, that I don't accept certain things, regardless of how I feel about the game. I'm here because I know Ryan reads these forums occassionally, and I want him to know that the way he handled this game is horrible, and that is why it's failing. PFO's ideas sound great, and honestly I would be pretty hyped for this game if it weren't for the business model, that and the fact that I don't trust this brand new company to follow through on all their promises, especially when seeing what they have produced so far. Promises are just promises. I don't pay money for promises, or ideas.

  • EdgeXEdgeX Member UncommonPosts: 39
    Accidental double post, and I don't see a delete post button.
  • rsdanceyrsdancey Member Posts: 106


    Originally posted by thundercles
    I think a definitive statement from the lead developer about the status of the game and what are some fair expectations would be helpful.

    Pathfinder Online is in Early Enrollment.

    Early Enrollment is not a "test". The game is live, and won't be wiped. The purpose of Early Enrollment is not to find and fix bugs (although we do that constantly).

    The objective is to begin play of the game with enough content and features to make it "work" as an MMO and then iterate and become more feature-rich, polished, and complex over time.

    The game is a Minimum Viable Product right now, and is being continuously developed towards a goal of reaching a level of development comparable with other MMO projects.

    It typically takes at least 5 years to release an MMO in the "traditional" process. We are approximately 2 years into that 5 year timeline. Most players have never seen a game in this stage of development before.

    We have two related goals regarding Early Enrollment.

    One: We want to Crowdforge the game. By that, I mean we want a real, two-way communication between the community and the development team so that the game actually represents a synthesis of input from both sides. We have achieved that, and we'll continue to work hard on that process throughout the life of the project.

    In order to enable Crowdforging to really work, players have to be in the game very early in its development. The way MMOs are made once a major game system is implemented it becomes increasingly hard and expensive to make fundamental changes. In traditional MMO development those kinds of changes are virtually impossible by the time players get to "beta test" the game. In Pathfinder Online, we're starting early enough in the development process that community feedback can meaningfully affect the game at a fundamental level.

    We think a huge part of the "value" of Early Enrollment is the experience of Crowdforging. People who are interested in seeing how an MMO is "really made", and people who have a desire to participate in the Crowdforging process are getting something with Pathfinder Online that they can't get with a traditionally designed project.

    Two: We need to fund the development of the game, in part, through revenue generated by the game.

    The appetite for investing in MMOs has vaporized. That's not surprising, since virtually none of them generated the returns on investment that people expected. MMOs over the past 10 years have become outrageously expensive to make. $100 million is a reasonable expectation for a game in the "AAA MMO" category. Assuming investors seek at least a 10x return on their investments, and that they'll own at least 50% of the equity in an MMO project, that implies that the game generates $2 billion in profits over its lifecycle.

    People made those pitches and raised investments with those numbers and none of those games delivered. As a result, nobody wants to invest in an MMO anymore.

    If you look at the recent and public spectacular failures in the space, like 38 Studios ($100+ million lost), World of Darkness (~$75 million lost), Project Titan at Blizzard (nobody can even hazard a guess but it's in the $100+ million range, for sure), not to mention projects that bubbled below the surface but didn't ever see much publicity like the rumored Call of Duty MMO, you can see why there are no AAA MMOs in development anywhere. These are 500 to 1,000 person teams, and they require years of work and investment. They're impossible to hide.

    To make an MMO in 2015 requires a different approach. Our solution to this problem was to make the smallest possible MMO we could, which implies the need to raise the smallest possible amount of capital. The tradeoff is that we are making an MVP, not a AAA MMO. We accept that the consequence is that a very, very small number of people (compared to the ~2 million Western market for a Fantasy Sandbox MMO that I think can be credibly defined) will be interested in paying to play it while it remains an MVP. We're ok with that - we built our business to work with a small player community.

    We generated money from Crowdfunding via Kickstarter. We raised about 3x as much from angel investors. And now we need revenues from operations to continue to develop the game. In 2015, this is a model that can work to enable the creation of an MMO when no other financing options are available, and that's why you see projects like Shroud of the Avatar, Camelot Unchained, Crowfall, etc. following the same strategy - raise Crowdfunding, raise private equity, and then raise ongoing revenue through sales.

    image

  • sevitothsevitoth Member UncommonPosts: 375
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Looks like Pathfinder is Slapshot's new Mortal Online. 

    Lol. I was just thinking the same thing.

     

     

    Currently Playing: DAOC Uthgard

    Previously Played: UO, DAOC, Shadowbane, AC2, SWG, Horizons, COX, WOW, EQ2, LOTRO, AOC, WAR, Vanguard, Rift, SWTOR, ESO, GW2.

  • F0URTWENTYF0URTWENTY Member UncommonPosts: 349
    Originally posted by rsdancey

     


    Originally posted by thundercles
    I think a definitive statement from the lead developer about the status of the game and what are some fair expectations would be helpful.

     

    Pathfinder Online is in Early Enrollment.

    Early Enrollment is not a "test". The game is live, and won't be wiped. The purpose of Early Enrollment is not to find and fix bugs (although we do that constantly).

    The objective is to begin play of the game with enough content and features to make it "work" as an MMO and then iterate and become more feature-rich, polished, and complex over time.

    The game is a Minimum Viable Product right now, and is being continuously developed towards a goal of reaching a level of development comparable with other MMO projects.

    It typically takes at least 5 years to release an MMO in the "traditional" process. We are approximately 2 years into that 5 year timeline. Most players have never seen a game in this stage of development before.

    We have two related goals regarding Early Enrollment.

    One: We want to Crowdforge the game. By that, I mean we want a real, two-way communication between the community and the development team so that the game actually represents a synthesis of input from both sides. We have achieved that, and we'll continue to work hard on that process throughout the life of the project.

    In order to enable Crowdforging to really work, players have to be in the game very early in its development. The way MMOs are made once a major game system is implemented it becomes increasingly hard and expensive to make fundamental changes. In traditional MMO development those kinds of changes are virtually impossible by the time players get to "beta test" the game. In Pathfinder Online, we're starting early enough in the development process that community feedback can meaningfully affect the game at a fundamental level.

    We think a huge part of the "value" of Early Enrollment is the experience of Crowdforging. People who are interested in seeing how an MMO is "really made", and people who have a desire to participate in the Crowdforging process are getting something with Pathfinder Online that they can't get with a traditionally designed project.

    Two: We need to fund the development of the game, in part, through revenue generated by the game.

    The appetite for investing in MMOs has vaporized. That's not surprising, since virtually none of them generated the returns on investment that people expected. MMOs over the past 10 years have become outrageously expensive to make. $100 million is a reasonable expectation for a game in the "AAA MMO" category. Assuming investors seek at least a 10x return on their investments, and that they'll own at least 50% of the equity in an MMO project, that implies that the game generates $2 billion in profits over its lifecycle.

    People made those pitches and raised investments with those numbers and none of those games delivered. As a result, nobody wants to invest in an MMO anymore.

    If you look at the recent and public spectacular failures in the space, like 38 Studios ($100+ million lost), World of Darkness (~$75 million lost), Project Titan at Blizzard (nobody can even hazard a guess but it's in the $100+ million range, for sure), not to mention projects that bubbled below the surface but didn't ever see much publicity like the rumored Call of Duty MMO, you can see why there are no AAA MMOs in development anywhere. These are 500 to 1,000 person teams, and they require years of work and investment. They're impossible to hide.

    To make an MMO in 2015 requires a different approach. Our solution to this problem was to make the smallest possible MMO we could, which implies the need to raise the smallest possible amount of capital. The tradeoff is that we are making an MVP, not a AAA MMO. We accept that the consequence is that a very, very small number of people (compared to the ~2 million Western market for a Fantasy Sandbox MMO that I think can be credibly defined) will be interested in paying to play it while it remains an MVP. We're ok with that - we built our business to work with a small player community.

    We generated money from Crowdfunding via Kickstarter. We raised about 3x as much from angel investors. And now we need revenues from operations to continue to develop the game. In 2015, this is a model that can work to enable the creation of an MMO when no other financing options are available, and that's why you see projects like Shroud of the Avatar, Camelot Unchained, Crowfall, etc. following the same strategy - raise Crowdfunding, raise private equity, and then raise ongoing revenue through sales.

    image

     

    I want to ask you rsdancey:

     

    I am a sandbox mmo player. I play Eve, Darkfall, Mortal. With the way you are charging for your minimum viable product, means me and most of the people in the guilds I play in won't be interested, even though we would probably be interested in the game a year or so down the road. Here is the problem:

     

    We are competitive pvp players. We don't think it's fair that people playing an alpha-quality product should be gaining xp in an eve type skill system and claiming a massive advantage over us when the game is finally worth playing.

     

    Do you realise that you are ensuring competitive players will never touch your game once it's finally in a playable state? My guilds certainly won't be interested in playing at a disadvantage to parked alpha characters with years of xp on us.

  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,049
    Originally posted by rsdancey

     

     

    It typically takes at least 5 years to release an MMO in the "traditional" process. We are approximately 2 years into that 5 year timeline. Most players have never seen a game in this stage of development before.

     

    Correct-  Because 2 years into a 5 year cycle most developers consider their product to be in an early testing phase (at best).  

     

    So.. in my opinion.. when you admit that the game you are charging a box price, sub fee AND cash shop for is in year 2 of 5 years it's disingenuous to in the same post say: "Early Enrollment is not a "test". The game is live, and won't be wiped. The purpose of Early Enrollment is not to find and fix bugs (although we do that constantly)."

     

    You can say it. You can call it anything you want.  People will choose whether what you are selling is REALLY a Minimal Viable Product.  So far from what I have seen, the market has disagreed with you.  We will see if this forces you to change your marketing tactics and do things like drop the box fee and/or change the sub.  My suspicion is that you won't have a choice and in the relatively near future (a few months) you will announce a new pricing model accompanied by marketing spiel about how this was "Crowdforged" or some such...

     

     

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

    My ignore list finally has one occupant after 12 years. I am the strongest supporter of free speech on here, but free speech does not mean forced listening. Have fun my friend. Hope you find a new stalking target.

  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,049
    Originally posted by Sketch420
     

     

    We are competitive pvp players. We don't think it's fair that people playing an alpha-quality product should be gaining xp in and eve type system and claiming a massive advantage over us when the game is release quality?

     

    Do you realise that you are ensuring competitive players will never touch your game once it's finally in a playable state? My guilds certainly won't be interested in playing at a disadvantage to parked alpha characters with years of xp on us.

    ABSOLUTELY.   I think they would have gotten FAR less flack if they just called it a pay for beta.. and planned for a wipe at the end so those that DIDN'T want to waste $600+ on a game over the next 3 plus years (to get to the 5 Ryan states it will be finished) would not be at a disadvantage in an open world PvP, territory control game...

     

     

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

    My ignore list finally has one occupant after 12 years. I am the strongest supporter of free speech on here, but free speech does not mean forced listening. Have fun my friend. Hope you find a new stalking target.

  • rsdanceyrsdancey Member Posts: 106

    You say that you play EVE.

    Did you start playing EVE on the first day, or did you start sometime after?

    Like EVE, our game is designed to have a power curve that becomes shallower over time, not remain a straight line. Six months in if you focus your training on being good at PvP, the differences in mechanical power between you and someone who started on the first day will be swamped by your skill, your gear, your friends and your tactics.

    Since this system has worked so well for EVE, we see no reason it won't also work for Pathfinder Online.

    typo fixed - thanks!

  • AudoucetAudoucet Member UncommonPosts: 69
    Originally posted by rsdancey

    In 2015, this is a model that can work to enable the creation of an MMO when no other financing options are available, and that's why you see projects like Shroud of the Avatar, Camelot Unchained, Crowfall, etc. following the same strategy - raise Crowdfunding, raise private equity, and then raise ongoing revenue through sales.

    2 of your examples don't necessitate subscriptions, and the other one will ask for a sub when the game is released, but yeah, whatever. 

  • TsaboHavocTsaboHavoc Member UncommonPosts: 435
    Originally posted by sevitoth
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Looks like Pathfinder is Slapshot's new Mortal Online. 

    Lol. I was just thinking the same thing.

     

     

    he brings many valid points in his posts. developers should think twice before scamming him lol

Sign In or Register to comment.