No, my point was specific and very easy to understand:
You said- He's never once said the game is complete
He said- We're in Early Enrollment, a complete game
Back onto the main point of this thread, which amazingly is pushing 9 pages... does anyone know if any other major gaming sites are preparing reviews of PFO?
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
does anyone know if any other major gaming sites are preparing reviews of PFO?
Nah, they all understood now that just reviewing the fun factor of the game isn't very objective.
It's the same as the subscriber numbers of swtor back then when it was new and someone claimed:
We can't release the number of our subscribers because calculating that includes a number of abstract factors and makes the formula to calculate the exact number very difficult.
I'll disagree on factions before feuds. Inter settlement conflict was always supposed to be the major conflict driver of the game. The persistent issue is that victory is unrewarding and death doesn't sting. Until they fix that you could remove reputation entirely and still not see very compelling PvP.
I believe Factions would breathe some "spirit", "life" or "flavor" into the game. There is no soul in this game, it is just a grind, and the only really interesting thing going on is the Forever War.
Factions are the pre cursor for alignment and role playing. Companies and even settlements might start competing or waging conflicts over factional differences.
Also, according the Lee Hammock, Factions are the easiest PVP enablers to implement.
But it still comes back to the issue of "What's the point?" So factional PvP gets enabled. Now you can kill people of opposing factions past a certain faction rank or with the "for the cause" flag enabled but.... the rewards are still marginal and you aren't really advancing any objective or cause. That's still PvP with no soul.
Crowd funding has nothing to do with the game. If you have something to judge it falls into 3 areas, 1. Good game 2. Bad game 3. Meh game. Hell any gamer can do that. All the staff on MMOrpg.com are well skilled enough to look past the norms of MMOs to see the good. Hell Bill is playing Skyforge and not judging it as crap just because its not a standard MMO.
Originally posted by Nanfoodle Crowd funding has nothing to do with the game. If you have something to judge it falls into 3 areas, 1. Good game 2. Bad game 3. Meh game. Hell any gamer can do that. All the staff on MMOrpg.com are well skilled enough to look past the norms of MMOs to see the good. Hell Bill is playing Skyforge and not judging it as crap just because its not a standard MMO.
Some people seem to be interchanging crowd funding with crowd forging. I'm sure the difference is understood. To the point that is being made about Crowd Forging.
Crowd Forging is done with every game being developed, and it has been done that way for decades. Future players, potential consumers, alpha and beta testers have also played a role in how a game is developed. PFO did not invent this, but it is the only one that charges a subscription during its alpha / beta stage and has convinced a handful that this is a unique privilege. It is no surprise that almost all of these players had little or no experience with MMOS, and likely never in alpha or beta stages.
Played: E&B, SWG, Eve, WoW, COH, WAR, POTBS, AOC, LOTRO, AUTO.A, AO, FE, TR, WWII, MWO, TSW, SWTOR, GW2, NWO, WoP, RUST, LIF, SOA, MORTAL, DFUW, AA, TF, PFO, ALBO, and many many others....
1. We (AGAIN) see posters taking quotes, changing the wording, and using the changed version for their points.
2. We have the same person, the Main Hater (or Mad Hatter) defending an old switcheroo (diff thread) where he used a "part" of a sentence for his agenda.
3. We have previous backers offering mini reviews. In Bluddwolf's, there are 4 points that have nothing to do with "playing the game" and everything to do with not getting his way served in the dev process.
4. Then we have the usual crowd. Those that smell blood, follow and see blood, and attack regardless of the fact that they haven't a clue. All they want to do is be a part of the cool "basher squad".
Too awesome! lol
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
I went to the original post the OP cited and noticed the first poster used the name "Bludd". Disclaimer, that was not me. I put my own post there to give MY point of view and review of the game.
I have since downgraded my original 6.0 rating to a range between 5.0 and 5.5. This downgrade is due in part to rating the community which I think is a legitimate factor when looking at an MMO.
Community Considerations:
1. Customer Service
2. Official Forums being fully featured
3. Community Management and Public Relations
Of these I find only Customer Service to be satisfactory, the othes below par.
Played: E&B, SWG, Eve, WoW, COH, WAR, POTBS, AOC, LOTRO, AUTO.A, AO, FE, TR, WWII, MWO, TSW, SWTOR, GW2, NWO, WoP, RUST, LIF, SOA, MORTAL, DFUW, AA, TF, PFO, ALBO, and many many others....
3. We have previous backers offering mini reviews. In Bluddwolf's, there are 4 points that have nothing to do with "playing the game" and everything to do with not getting his way served in the dev process.
4. Then we have the usual crowd. Those that smell blood, follow and see blood, and attack regardless of the fact that they haven't a clue. All they want to do is be a part of the cool "basher squad".
Too awesome! lol
Your failure to understand the game play impact of developing a game out of a logical sequence says more about your inexperience than it does about my review.
Need I remind you of how poorly the company based UI was when first implemented. Or how about the fact that all players had to join one company in order to support a settlement? Or how about how there was only one leader for a settlement, and if he or she was not online, nothing could happen. Then we have the War of Towers, which has been universally described as a poorly implemented system. Again, initially, only one company could capture towers for a settlement. It was easier to just capture another tower than it was to hold your own. At time the flagging system did not work and some lost rep for defending their own towers (although fixed this bug early on).
I could go on and on, system by system and explain how the sequence of implementation impacted game play. Backwards planning is a good thing. Backwards or out of sequence implementation always leads to unintended consequences and usually leads to a muddled mess.
An then we have the usual crowd (of three) who will accept any half-assed implementation and the almost predictable impending shut down, as long as they have their Care Bear Utopia in an underpopulated, underdeveloped, underwhelming, multiplayer game where they can have some sense of accomplishment in building something without any real risk.
The fact that the three most vocal supporters of PFO are self described as having little taste for PVP, in a game that is supposedly an Open World PVP MMO, kind of says it all.
Played: E&B, SWG, Eve, WoW, COH, WAR, POTBS, AOC, LOTRO, AUTO.A, AO, FE, TR, WWII, MWO, TSW, SWTOR, GW2, NWO, WoP, RUST, LIF, SOA, MORTAL, DFUW, AA, TF, PFO, ALBO, and many many others....
We could not get any money via normal means, i.e. Investors, Publishers, so we have to come to you the players!
Please give Pathfinder Online and all the other crowd sourcing, backers programs, forge sourcing, crowd sourcing, Founders, and Early Access programs your money!
And remember, regardless of how good or bad the game looks at any point it is Pre-Alpha, Early Alpha, Alpha, Early BETA, Closed BETA, Open BETA... Thus, do not say anything bad about the games because they are under development, under a constant state of flux, and may not even resemble the game you first paid money into.
So just BE QUIET, we got YOUR MONEY, we dont have to answer to a publishing company who at the first sign of BS can drop us...oh no, you are stuck with us, our game, and woe to anyone who gives a negative opinion, because we hired "reputationdefender.com" to flood the forums with people to shut down any negativity and boost up any positive opinions.
Oh and by the way, its ALL YOUR FAULT!
We need more players to blindly throw us money, so we can continue to make money in this new day and age of "we dont need no stinkin publisher" we have a whole bunch of players who think funding pc games blindly is the norm and woe to anyone who pays money and then doesnt like the way development is going.
THIS WAS NOT THE NORM, IT SHOULD NOT BE THE NORM NOW, BUT WE HAVE ALLOWED IT TO BE, AND THE FANBOIs MAKE SURE THAT ANYONE WHO GIVES A NEGATIVE OPINION WILL BE CHASTISED.
And Pathfinder Online and their CEO represents one of the best examples of this, because its your fault we dont have enough money and interest in the game, go tell your friends and if they wont give their money to this game willingly, make them!
Originally posted by Theocritus What is crowdforging? Sounds like worthless internet slang.
Crowd Forging means that the players get to see systems early and then have some input in their final implementation. This however is nothing new and occurs in every game I have ever seen. The only difference is that Goblin Works has managed to convince some players that this is a privilige that they should be happy to pay for on a subscription basis. Essentially it is pay to beta.
Now that in itself is nothing new either, and a number of developers have pay to gain access to alpha / beta, but those are usually a box fee, or one time fee. PFO is the first that had box fee, subscription fee and a MT store all prior to its official release.
I'm hoping other developers bear witness to the backlash and low turn out for this business model and decide that it is a loser straight out of the gate.
Played: E&B, SWG, Eve, WoW, COH, WAR, POTBS, AOC, LOTRO, AUTO.A, AO, FE, TR, WWII, MWO, TSW, SWTOR, GW2, NWO, WoP, RUST, LIF, SOA, MORTAL, DFUW, AA, TF, PFO, ALBO, and many many others....
4. Then we have the usual crowd. Those that smell blood, follow and see blood, and attack regardless of the fact that they haven't a clue. All they want to do is be a part of the cool "basher squad".
Too awesome! lol
You're comparing PFO to a weak, dying wounded animal.
4. Then we have the usual crowd. Those that smell blood, follow and see blood, and attack regardless of the fact that they haven't a clue. All they want to do is be a part of the cool "basher squad".
Too awesome! lol
You're comparing PFO to a weak, dying wounded animal.
I suppose that it would be easy to infer that from my post.
What I mean (and did a poor job at clarifying) is that there are a good number of posters on this site (and I am sure others) that like to bash at things when they see others do it. Not because they know anything personally about the subject.
When someone rewrites quotes (completely making them "not quotes") and/or takes quotes out of context and/or quotes just a part of a sentence... AND a sizable number of people jump onto that warship because of those bits of deliberate misinformation, they look like... I don't know. Misinformed readers?
For those who do that misrepresentation:
It is deliberate bs to further your daily/weekly quota of ... whatever floats your warship to make your point.
If it isn't deliberate, then perhaps it is very poor reading comprehension.... I don't know how to fix that, here. They should take a class somewhere to help with that.
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
3. We have previous backers offering mini reviews. In Bluddwolf's, there are 4 points that have nothing to do with "playing the game" and everything to do with not getting his way served in the dev process.
4. Then we have the usual crowd. Those that smell blood, follow and see blood, and attack regardless of the fact that they haven't a clue. All they want to do is be a part of the cool "basher squad".
Too awesome! lol
Your failure to understand the game play impact of developing a game out of a logical sequence says more about your inexperience than it does about my review.
Need I remind you of how poorly the company based UI was when first implemented. Or how about the fact that all players had to join one company in order to support a settlement? Or how about how there was only one leader for a settlement, and if he or she was not online, nothing could happen. Then we have the War of Towers, which has been universally described as a poorly implemented system. Again, initially, only one company could capture towers for a settlement. It was easier to just capture another tower than it was to hold your own. At time the flagging system did not work and some lost rep for defending their own towers (although fixed this bug early on).
I could go on and on, system by system and explain how the sequence of implementation impacted game play. Backwards planning is a good thing. Backwards or out of sequence implementation always leads to unintended consequences and usually leads to a muddled mess.
An then we have the usual crowd (of three) who will accept any half-assed implementation and the almost predictable impending shut down, as long as they have their Care Bear Utopia in an underpopulated, underdeveloped, underwhelming, multiplayer game where they can have some sense of accomplishment in building something without any real risk.
The fact that the three most vocal supporters of PFO are self described as having little taste for PVP, in a game that is supposedly an Open World PVP MMO, kind of says it all.
As usual, you use nonsense as debate material. All of those systems are unpolished/early versions of end goals.
Things like the war of towers did kinda suck balls, but it was a temporary fix, not a finished mechanic. It was there to keep us busy until early versions of the real deal could be put together. IF it had been meant to be fun and engaging to all, it would have been built that way, but why would they need to do that since it was a "temp" solution?
The lack of experience that you describe is really in your backpack. You do talk a mean game, but you amount to basically nothing when you get into a game. As usual, you offer excuses when you can't perform the things that you talk about performing for 2 years before the game starts. Your plans collapsed and you blame the community and GW for that. Well guess what? There is a decent amount of PVP happening in the game right now, including killing players for "war" reasons and just to loot stuff from them. Where are you?
Who are those 3? The ones that describe themselves as having little taste for PVP? If I am one, then Brother, I have to say that I have PVPed in this game probably 3 times more than you have in this game, both on offence and defense.
Not disagreeing that your review is valid in what it covers. Just stating that it is not about the "inside" of the game. Your review is greatly skewed because (like some others) you did not get the things that you want coded in the order that you want.
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
If it isn't deliberate, then perhaps it is very poor reading comprehension.... I don't know how to fix that, here. They should take a class somewhere to help with that.
Are you talking about Caldeathe's refusal to aknowledge that Ryan clearly stated that the game was live, complete, playable, and just missing non essential features ?
If it isn't deliberate, then perhaps it is very poor reading comprehension.... I don't know how to fix that, here. They should take a class somewhere to help with that.
Are you talking about Caldeathe's refusal to aknowledge that Ryan clearly stated that the game was live, complete, playable, and just missing non essential features ?
Tell you what. Show me some quotes (actual quotes - not doctored quotes) and LINKS of Ryan Dancey writing ALL of those things. Don't read between the lines. If part of the paragraph or full statement adds context that is important to the quote, include that for a non biased look at what really was written. No 1/2 sentences, no bs, just an honest look at what was written.
If you can't find that, then try a new angle.
If you do find it, we will have a debate. If it looks like you are right, I will acknowledge such. If you are wrong and you fail to see something that is context and disproving your assertions, I will try and show you why, ONE TIME. After that, I can recommend a reading comprehension tutor.
A challenge is laid before you. How good is your Game-Fu?
Otherwise, please don't tempt me to waste more of my time. I value my time.
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
Ryan Dancy: This is not a game in any sort of "test" mode. We are not "alpha" or "beta" testing. We're in Early Enrollment - a complete game with limited features that are being iterated and expanded based on Crowdforging with our players.
And none of us will stop reading between the lines.
Ryan Dancey is only good at one thing and that is changing the meaning of words.
Objectivity...that means focusing purely on the fun and features a game provides.
To RD it means his game deserves bonus points for shaping up based on the feedback of players.
That would still be halfway ok if he didn't criticize reviews made by neutral sources and openly said he will find people who will review his game with his definition of "objective"
Well i do understand the frustration as a businessman to sell his product and get it out there,you can't help but take notice of the FLOODED market and the myriad of BAD games.
This market cannot support the massive amount of games it receives,no way no how.The market needs to start weeding out all these wannabe developers.
They tried to use the F2P gimmick to get people to play their under rated games,sorry but MOST of these games are simply NOT good enough.
Yes you can likely find someone to post some positive things about PO but i tried the game and imo it is NOT good enough.We already have a massive amount of choice ,a developer needs to set itself a part from the rest if it wants to succeed.
My point to the PO CEO is that if you want your game to receive accolades,the game needs to earn it and PO does not deserve accolades.
Here is a thought an idea,you know all those times when developers say "we listen to feedback",perhaps instead of using it s a nice PR speech,how about listening to the gaming public?
Here are a few points to take note of...
SOME crap games can make it big because they have a known IP title or they are released by a big name developer example Blizzard can sell rubbish and make profits.Some devs can make it on nothing but LUCK and timing,example jump on the bandwagon of a new idea or a popular TV series.However for the vast majority of develoeprs they will ONLY make it big if they can sell a really good product,NOT something they think is average to good but it needs to be REALLY good.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
blah blah blah...go to the Pathfinder Online website, watch the videos on uTube, read what the CEO has to say.
DONE....The Pathfinder Online project represents the best example of why you should avoid backing, founding, help kick start or otherwise spend your money on anything but a finished game.
After reading that several times,what it really sounds like is that he thinks everyone who likes the crowdforging idea MUST say they like every game doing it.
Just because you allow someone early access to see you go through the phases of development does not AUTO mean GREAT job.
If as a developer you are TRULY building a game centered around the public's opinion then you need to listen to what they are saying,you don't accomplish that by TELLING them what to say.
The real truth is there is 100% absolutely NO WAY anyone can build a game from public opinion.There are far too many people with too many opinions,you need to simply build your game and hope it is good enough to sell.You can tell the people willing to give your game some free money you are listening to them,but you know that is bull shit,you can't have your cake and eat it too.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
After reading that several times,what it really sounds like is that he thinks everyone who likes the crowdforging idea MUST say they like every game doing it.
I remember it was similar with Mortal Online back then.
The critics would point out what a buggy shitty mess the game was despite some good ideas.
The fans would attack them and make claims like: "If you don't support this game then you are hurting the whole genre!"
Comments
No, my point was specific and very easy to understand:
You said- He's never once said the game is complete
He said- We're in Early Enrollment, a complete game
Back onto the main point of this thread, which amazingly is pushing 9 pages... does anyone know if any other major gaming sites are preparing reviews of PFO?
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
Nah, they all understood now that just reviewing the fun factor of the game isn't very objective.
It's the same as the subscriber numbers of swtor back then when it was new and someone claimed:
We can't release the number of our subscribers because calculating that includes a number of abstract factors and makes the formula to calculate the exact number very difficult.
But it still comes back to the issue of "What's the point?" So factional PvP gets enabled. Now you can kill people of opposing factions past a certain faction rank or with the "for the cause" flag enabled but.... the rewards are still marginal and you aren't really advancing any objective or cause. That's still PvP with no soul.
Some people seem to be interchanging crowd funding with crowd forging. I'm sure the difference is understood. To the point that is being made about Crowd Forging.
Crowd Forging is done with every game being developed, and it has been done that way for decades. Future players, potential consumers, alpha and beta testers have also played a role in how a game is developed. PFO did not invent this, but it is the only one that charges a subscription during its alpha / beta stage and has convinced a handful that this is a unique privilege. It is no surprise that almost all of these players had little or no experience with MMOS, and likely never in alpha or beta stages.
Played: E&B, SWG, Eve, WoW, COH, WAR, POTBS, AOC, LOTRO, AUTO.A, AO, FE, TR, WWII, MWO, TSW, SWTOR, GW2, NWO, WoP, RUST, LIF, SOA, MORTAL, DFUW, AA, TF, PFO, ALBO, and many many others....
Steam: Neph
This really is a funny tread.
1. We (AGAIN) see posters taking quotes, changing the wording, and using the changed version for their points.
2. We have the same person, the Main Hater (or Mad Hatter) defending an old switcheroo (diff thread) where he used a "part" of a sentence for his agenda.
3. We have previous backers offering mini reviews. In Bluddwolf's, there are 4 points that have nothing to do with "playing the game" and everything to do with not getting his way served in the dev process.
4. Then we have the usual crowd. Those that smell blood, follow and see blood, and attack regardless of the fact that they haven't a clue. All they want to do is be a part of the cool "basher squad".
Too awesome! lol
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
I went to the original post the OP cited and noticed the first poster used the name "Bludd". Disclaimer, that was not me. I put my own post there to give MY point of view and review of the game.
I have since downgraded my original 6.0 rating to a range between 5.0 and 5.5. This downgrade is due in part to rating the community which I think is a legitimate factor when looking at an MMO.
Community Considerations:
1. Customer Service
2. Official Forums being fully featured
3. Community Management and Public Relations
Of these I find only Customer Service to be satisfactory, the othes below par.
Played: E&B, SWG, Eve, WoW, COH, WAR, POTBS, AOC, LOTRO, AUTO.A, AO, FE, TR, WWII, MWO, TSW, SWTOR, GW2, NWO, WoP, RUST, LIF, SOA, MORTAL, DFUW, AA, TF, PFO, ALBO, and many many others....
lol !
Joined - July 2004
Your failure to understand the game play impact of developing a game out of a logical sequence says more about your inexperience than it does about my review.
Need I remind you of how poorly the company based UI was when first implemented. Or how about the fact that all players had to join one company in order to support a settlement? Or how about how there was only one leader for a settlement, and if he or she was not online, nothing could happen. Then we have the War of Towers, which has been universally described as a poorly implemented system. Again, initially, only one company could capture towers for a settlement. It was easier to just capture another tower than it was to hold your own. At time the flagging system did not work and some lost rep for defending their own towers (although fixed this bug early on).
I could go on and on, system by system and explain how the sequence of implementation impacted game play. Backwards planning is a good thing. Backwards or out of sequence implementation always leads to unintended consequences and usually leads to a muddled mess.
An then we have the usual crowd (of three) who will accept any half-assed implementation and the almost predictable impending shut down, as long as they have their Care Bear Utopia in an underpopulated, underdeveloped, underwhelming, multiplayer game where they can have some sense of accomplishment in building something without any real risk.
The fact that the three most vocal supporters of PFO are self described as having little taste for PVP, in a game that is supposedly an Open World PVP MMO, kind of says it all.
Played: E&B, SWG, Eve, WoW, COH, WAR, POTBS, AOC, LOTRO, AUTO.A, AO, FE, TR, WWII, MWO, TSW, SWTOR, GW2, NWO, WoP, RUST, LIF, SOA, MORTAL, DFUW, AA, TF, PFO, ALBO, and many many others....
Give us your money!
We could not get any money via normal means, i.e. Investors, Publishers, so we have to come to you the players!
Please give Pathfinder Online and all the other crowd sourcing, backers programs, forge sourcing, crowd sourcing, Founders, and Early Access programs your money!
And remember, regardless of how good or bad the game looks at any point it is Pre-Alpha, Early Alpha, Alpha, Early BETA, Closed BETA, Open BETA... Thus, do not say anything bad about the games because they are under development, under a constant state of flux, and may not even resemble the game you first paid money into.
So just BE QUIET, we got YOUR MONEY, we dont have to answer to a publishing company who at the first sign of BS can drop us...oh no, you are stuck with us, our game, and woe to anyone who gives a negative opinion, because we hired "reputationdefender.com" to flood the forums with people to shut down any negativity and boost up any positive opinions.
Oh and by the way, its ALL YOUR FAULT!
We need more players to blindly throw us money, so we can continue to make money in this new day and age of "we dont need no stinkin publisher" we have a whole bunch of players who think funding pc games blindly is the norm and woe to anyone who pays money and then doesnt like the way development is going.
THIS WAS NOT THE NORM, IT SHOULD NOT BE THE NORM NOW, BUT WE HAVE ALLOWED IT TO BE, AND THE FANBOIs MAKE SURE THAT ANYONE WHO GIVES A NEGATIVE OPINION WILL BE CHASTISED.
And Pathfinder Online and their CEO represents one of the best examples of this, because its your fault we dont have enough money and interest in the game, go tell your friends and if they wont give their money to this game willingly, make them!
Crowd Forging means that the players get to see systems early and then have some input in their final implementation. This however is nothing new and occurs in every game I have ever seen. The only difference is that Goblin Works has managed to convince some players that this is a privilige that they should be happy to pay for on a subscription basis. Essentially it is pay to beta.
Now that in itself is nothing new either, and a number of developers have pay to gain access to alpha / beta, but those are usually a box fee, or one time fee. PFO is the first that had box fee, subscription fee and a MT store all prior to its official release.
I'm hoping other developers bear witness to the backlash and low turn out for this business model and decide that it is a loser straight out of the gate.
Played: E&B, SWG, Eve, WoW, COH, WAR, POTBS, AOC, LOTRO, AUTO.A, AO, FE, TR, WWII, MWO, TSW, SWTOR, GW2, NWO, WoP, RUST, LIF, SOA, MORTAL, DFUW, AA, TF, PFO, ALBO, and many many others....
You're comparing PFO to a weak, dying wounded animal.
I suppose that it would be easy to infer that from my post.
What I mean (and did a poor job at clarifying) is that there are a good number of posters on this site (and I am sure others) that like to bash at things when they see others do it. Not because they know anything personally about the subject.
When someone rewrites quotes (completely making them "not quotes") and/or takes quotes out of context and/or quotes just a part of a sentence... AND a sizable number of people jump onto that warship because of those bits of deliberate misinformation, they look like... I don't know. Misinformed readers?
For those who do that misrepresentation:
It is deliberate bs to further your daily/weekly quota of ... whatever floats your warship to make your point.
If it isn't deliberate, then perhaps it is very poor reading comprehension.... I don't know how to fix that, here. They should take a class somewhere to help with that.
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
As usual, you use nonsense as debate material. All of those systems are unpolished/early versions of end goals.
Things like the war of towers did kinda suck balls, but it was a temporary fix, not a finished mechanic. It was there to keep us busy until early versions of the real deal could be put together. IF it had been meant to be fun and engaging to all, it would have been built that way, but why would they need to do that since it was a "temp" solution?
The lack of experience that you describe is really in your backpack. You do talk a mean game, but you amount to basically nothing when you get into a game. As usual, you offer excuses when you can't perform the things that you talk about performing for 2 years before the game starts. Your plans collapsed and you blame the community and GW for that. Well guess what? There is a decent amount of PVP happening in the game right now, including killing players for "war" reasons and just to loot stuff from them. Where are you?
Who are those 3? The ones that describe themselves as having little taste for PVP? If I am one, then Brother, I have to say that I have PVPed in this game probably 3 times more than you have in this game, both on offence and defense.
Not disagreeing that your review is valid in what it covers. Just stating that it is not about the "inside" of the game. Your review is greatly skewed because (like some others) you did not get the things that you want coded in the order that you want.
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
Are you talking about Caldeathe's refusal to aknowledge that Ryan clearly stated that the game was live, complete, playable, and just missing non essential features ?
Tell you what. Show me some quotes (actual quotes - not doctored quotes) and LINKS of Ryan Dancey writing ALL of those things. Don't read between the lines. If part of the paragraph or full statement adds context that is important to the quote, include that for a non biased look at what really was written. No 1/2 sentences, no bs, just an honest look at what was written.
If you can't find that, then try a new angle.
If you do find it, we will have a debate. If it looks like you are right, I will acknowledge such. If you are wrong and you fail to see something that is context and disproving your assertions, I will try and show you why, ONE TIME. After that, I can recommend a reading comprehension tutor.
A challenge is laid before you. How good is your Game-Fu?
Otherwise, please don't tempt me to waste more of my time. I value my time.
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
Here is the link so you can stop suggesting that we are making things up:
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/post/6639231#6639231
And none of us will stop reading between the lines.
Ryan Dancey is only good at one thing and that is changing the meaning of words.
Objectivity...that means focusing purely on the fun and features a game provides.
To RD it means his game deserves bonus points for shaping up based on the feedback of players.
That would still be halfway ok if he didn't criticize reviews made by neutral sources and openly said he will find people who will review his game with his definition of "objective"
Well i do understand the frustration as a businessman to sell his product and get it out there,you can't help but take notice of the FLOODED market and the myriad of BAD games.
This market cannot support the massive amount of games it receives,no way no how.The market needs to start weeding out all these wannabe developers.
They tried to use the F2P gimmick to get people to play their under rated games,sorry but MOST of these games are simply NOT good enough.
Yes you can likely find someone to post some positive things about PO but i tried the game and imo it is NOT good enough.We already have a massive amount of choice ,a developer needs to set itself a part from the rest if it wants to succeed.
My point to the PO CEO is that if you want your game to receive accolades,the game needs to earn it and PO does not deserve accolades.
Here is a thought an idea,you know all those times when developers say "we listen to feedback",perhaps instead of using it s a nice PR speech,how about listening to the gaming public?
Here are a few points to take note of...
SOME crap games can make it big because they have a known IP title or they are released by a big name developer example Blizzard can sell rubbish and make profits.Some devs can make it on nothing but LUCK and timing,example jump on the bandwagon of a new idea or a popular TV series.However for the vast majority of develoeprs they will ONLY make it big if they can sell a really good product,NOT something they think is average to good but it needs to be REALLY good.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
blah blah blah...go to the Pathfinder Online website, watch the videos on uTube, read what the CEO has to say.
DONE....The Pathfinder Online project represents the best example of why you should avoid backing, founding, help kick start or otherwise spend your money on anything but a finished game.
After reading that several times,what it really sounds like is that he thinks everyone who likes the crowdforging idea MUST say they like every game doing it.
Just because you allow someone early access to see you go through the phases of development does not AUTO mean GREAT job.
If as a developer you are TRULY building a game centered around the public's opinion then you need to listen to what they are saying,you don't accomplish that by TELLING them what to say.
The real truth is there is 100% absolutely NO WAY anyone can build a game from public opinion.There are far too many people with too many opinions,you need to simply build your game and hope it is good enough to sell.You can tell the people willing to give your game some free money you are listening to them,but you know that is bull shit,you can't have your cake and eat it too.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I remember it was similar with Mortal Online back then.
The critics would point out what a buggy shitty mess the game was despite some good ideas.
The fans would attack them and make claims like: "If you don't support this game then you are hurting the whole genre!"
The main difference is that Mortal has some of their great ideas actually in the game while PFO's are purely contained within the blogs.