Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
CEO claims frustration that "there doesn't seem to be any way to review the game objectively"
Slapshot1188
Member LegendaryPosts: 16,982
Ryan Dancy
<p may-blank-within="" md-container="" "="">
Not sure how comfortable I am seeing the CEO state that he is telling his "friends" at sites like MMORPG (specifically mentioned) who he thinks should review his game...
Can't help but wonder if this is related to the change of reviewer for the game.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
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
Comments
It's probably in response to the negative review. I doubt he convinced Bill into assigning a new reviewer for the game.
It also doesn't sound like he's having much success in finding what he wants.
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
https://www.ashesofcreation.com/ref/Callaron/
He doesn't specifically mention MMORPG.com. He refers to the mmorpg press as part of his greater network of press/media connections.
Dude, we get it - You have some kind of issue with this guy. Take it to IMs with Ryan, hug it out, do whatever you gotta do, but spamming this site with this tired shtick of "I'm just concerned" is getting old.
Get over it or get new material.
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
Actually, it's quite the opposite. Bill said "I’m beginning to feel like I’m too close to the game to give it a fully unbiased review" so he handed it off to Steve to give the site's readers an objective view of the game.
Don't let that get in the way of your tinfoil and conspiracies, though.
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
Tldr: rough game + crowdforging does not equal good review.
That's a really good point. If he's looking for people to focus on the crowdforging aspects and the strength of the dev/community relationship, he's probably better off looking toward game developer publications/sites than gaming sites. ex: Gamedev.net, EDGE magazine, Gamasutra, IGDA. The gaming sites are going to review the game, not the game creation process, and so far it's a unanimous verdict on the game itself.
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 do have a tinfoil theory - it involves you attacking the OP and valiantly defending this game.
I agree. The game might have some problems and needs work before I'd consider it, but at least these guys are transparent, Anyone can get a free try of the game, it makes the personal crusade against the Devs look quite suspect IMO.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
If I've written a new death metal opera I'm not going to want a critic of Armenian folk music to write the review.
If you could, please link to where I "valiantly defended" the game. I don't think I've tossed my hat in the ring for either side on PFO. I may have, though. If so, please link to it. I'm interested in what gave you that impression.
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
As an outsider that just peeks at this game's development every now and then. I have to say that Dancy's comments about how the game is being reviewed and received and how fans should spread the good word stick out like a sore thumb and are a case study in why developers should quietly develop and insulate themselves by hiring PR experts to do the engaging for them.
What some see as refreshing transparency, many of us see as desperate attempts at manipulation. I guess Derek Smart and Smedley's examples of why you shouldn't do this are not enough.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
This is the risk you run when you announce your game as ready for consumption and begin charging for it.
I hope future devs, including Pantheon's, learn that the game you launch, though perhaps only a lite version, better not lack the polish and appeal of the finished product.
An objective review of a video game. Poor fella.
Well, he have some point. Having someone who only enjoy typical themepark MMOs is only valid to other people with the same taste, kinda like letting something who only listen to metal review a rap album.
But I don't think the dev team actually should have any say in who get to review their game either, that kinda takes out the point of making reviews. It is the sites job to find someone who can review a game fairly, not the devs.
That Pathfinder gets bad scores could of course be because none of the reviewers are in the right focus group but the game is honestly in a pretty crappy state and shouldn't started to charge anyone yet so the question is if even players who enjoy this type of game would score it much higher.
This site usually gives pretty fair reviews and if it faults somewhere it is that it often is too generous with the score. I don't hang out so much at other sites so I don't know how things are there.
We do remember Eurogamers review of DFO though with a 1 of 10 score which felt unfair, DFO might have many flaws but considering the scores EUGamer usually gives out it should have gotten something like 4 of 10.
Crowdforging experience is subjective and usually you either care for it a lot or you don't care for it at all. I don't think its something that a reviewer should spend much time writing about, a columnist will do a far better job talking about it because they can give a far more subjective description about it.
Instead of asking for it to be part of the review he would be better served asking if he could talk about it in a column where he could speak of what they have done with it and how its changing the game for the better.
Personally the crowdforging thing he is pushing is much ado about nothing at this point. If you're going to crowdforge, you can do it during test phases with those who backed your game. Once you start charging for the game, crowdforging is no longer a feature or an excuse.
As to a reviewer that understands what they are trying to create, I think the guy who took over for Bill seemed perfectly suited. He had a knowledge of Eve and an appreciation for sandbox games in general. I think what the CEO actually means, is he just wants a reviewer that likes his game.
RD can't see a very simple truth : even in games like SWTOR, there has been as much crowdforging as in PFO, for better or worse.
I know, because I actually contributed in a very big part of SWTOR, which is the "mod" system. It wasn't in the game at the beginning of beta, but we have succeeded in obtaining some kind of appearance choice over our characters, after a lot of lobbying.
And that's just the thing that I personally lead, with my 3000+ beta players petition. Lots of people crowdforged other things. That's called beta process...
Well that's really the elephant in the room isn't it? Does he really expect that someone who "sees value in the crowdforging experience" will gloss over the fact that charging a sub to play an early access game is a very unusual weird-ass move?
If you want the game previewed as an early access alpha or beta you don't start charging a sub or open up a cash store.
Neverwinter tried the same shit with their endless "open beta." They tried to do a pre-emptive strike against being reviewed by declaring that it was just beta... and then they opened up the cash store and made characters there permanent. So the gaming media saw this and said "Screw you. Call it a beta if you want but you're monetizing it as a finished product... here's our review."
You can't have it both ways. And even the blindest pro-crowdsourcing fanboy who wants to keep a shred of credibility will need to take the post-release monetization model into consideration when rating this. Sorry... you want to be reviewed as an unfinished work in progress? Drop the sub.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
so let see if I get it, the game who is in a alpha state with monthly fee, having the ceo complaning about his player base not forcing people to play it, now want people to write review he want, if not its not valid, plus he want some handicap for it being a crownfunding game?
I find more awesome the fact he still have a game to work on....
Truth. The only thing unique about PFO's "Crowdforging" process is the number of players. Individual players get more input because there are fewer of them. But there are many MMOs that pull development ideas from the forums which is prettymuch all PFO's "Crowdforging" process boiled down to. I remember how it went when I set in motion the Crowdforging process that turned capstones into dedication bonuses. We the players talked with each other with very minimal feedback from GW until they announced their decision. It wasn't like developing the game alongside them. Their internal discussions stayed internal. Honestly Crowfall is leaps and bounds ahead in terms of communication with their community.
Yeah, I agree with you 100% there. As soon as a game actually cost moneyit is fair to review it like a released game.
This is not what he said at all.
I'm no fan of the game really, but if you are going to criticise at least be fair enough to respond to what he said, not what you wanted him to be saying.
That's a choice the player makes though isn't it? They agree to pay for a early access game.. That's how everything in business works, if people are willing to pay... it's acceptable to that crowd. So I don't see where a review should differ, they know what they were getting into.... Of course they should be honest, yet at the same time, they should also take the fact they opted in as well into account.
Anyway...I'd rather have a dev tell me before I pay anything.. hey this game isn't done it's still in so and so state... than see them, like every other Studio, publishing unfinished games and passing them off as gone gold. Which is pretty much common practice, look at ESO and many many others when they released.
On top of that they'll give you free time, which gives you ample evidence whether you'd feel it's worth it or not. I really don't see the problem here.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson