Howdy, Stranger!

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

[VIDEO] Some History and Observations...

BitterClingerBitterClinger Member UncommonPosts: 435
* Extreme Nerd Alert - Lots of talk about Dungeons and Dragons and tabletop game licensing! *

This has always been a heart-breaker for me. I feature the interview I watched on this site where Ryan Dancey made me laugh, cry, and then angry. I got over it and moved on, but I never really said what I wanted to say about the entire debacle, until now.

This is not a rant. In fact this video has a nerd factor that few are going to be able to tolerate for very long, but if you can make it through the first segment; it's an interesting story.

Comments

  • PottedPlant22PottedPlant22 Member RarePosts: 796
    A little shocked that you spent time in making an actually well put together video, but failed to do proper research on a critical point in regards to your critique of Pathfinder Online.  As made public multiple times and even during the 2nd Kickstarter, Goblin Works was not allowed to use the OGL 'd20 system' for other media.  The use of the OGL specifically precludes anyone from using it in things like video games.  

    Part of this is because DDO - Dungeon and Dragons Online uses the d20 system for their MMO.  Turbine would probably have a problem with Pathfinder using it.  Also Goblin Works was so concerned about getting sued, that many of the monsters used in the Pathfinder RPG couldn't make its way into PFO.  Even creatures that they probably could use because D&D pulled them from mythology, they said they would shy away from.

    The video besides that I liked and will definitely look into checking out other things you've done.  
  • BitterClingerBitterClinger Member UncommonPosts: 435
    Thanks for the feedback. I'll take your word for it, but I'm fairly certain no Pathfinder content has anything to do with the d20 system license. Also, I did do some research on OGL, and the FAQ on WOTC site clearly stated OGL content is allowed in "computer software".
  • PottedPlant22PottedPlant22 Member RarePosts: 796
    Understand what you're getting at, but that refers to character creators and supplements for the RPG book.  Not a complete game in of itself.

    Specifically this part as an example:

    Q: Why can't I use those things in my program?

    A: No d20 System Product can include rules for character creation or applying experience. In exchange for using the d20 logo you are prohibited from making a product that replaces the core rulebooks. Covered Products supplement the core rulebooks; they may not replace them. That is why all Covered Products must state that they require the use of the core rules.

    The interactive game restriction exists because Wizards has an exclusive licensee for all interactive games. Authorizing other parties to make electronic games would violate the exclusive terms of that license.


    I don't have time to look for it now, but I know Dancey made a comment describing why they couldn't use the D20 system a couple of times.  The question came up a lot during early development of the game and a major detractor for it for obvious reasons.  Also, the game was 'inspired' by the Kingmaker Campaign the Tabletop RPG put out.  The inspiration is debatable about how well they did with bringing that into the game, if at all.


  • BitterClingerBitterClinger Member UncommonPosts: 435
    Well, I understand about the d20 license, but that doesn't have anything to do with Paizo or the Pathfinder RPG. As part of my research for this video, I asked the folks at Paizo whether ANY of their Pathfinder products were published under the d20 license.

    Vic Wertz, the CTO at Paizo offered the following response: "Nope—we didn't use the d20 System license for any of our OGL products."

    That's pasted directly as it was sent to me.

    So, Pathfinder content is published under the OGL (not d20 system), and the FAQ for the OGL on the WOTC site states it is permitted in "computer software".

    It seems a little more investigation into the restrictions of the OGL may be warranted. Might be a subject for a future response video.
  • imagineifyouwillimagineifyouwill Member CommonPosts: 1
    From the Wizards.com faq: "The biggest problem we've found with software and the OGL is that programmers aren't paying attention to Section 8 of the OGL. Section 8 states: If you distribute Open Game Content You must clearly indicate which portions of the work that you are distributing are Open Content. This doesn't mean you can say all rules in my program are Open, the users need to be able to see all that Open Content. " I'm having trouble imagining how that would be implemented in an MMO, which doesn't mean it isn't possible, but they'd have to do it to the satisfaction of Wizards, and it could open them up to trouble..

    In addition, using the OGL means that you are required to place anything related to those mechanics into the public domain under the same license. Any code that builds on anything OGL related, anyone else could take and use without payment, and more importantly, the creator can't restrict other people from making things that work with those systems. That might mean they might not be able to ban or sue people for making add-ons that subvert the game.


  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Member EpicPosts: 7,723
    I get where you are coming from but medium to medium, sometimes things cant translate. Its why a single source, the movie, book, video game and show can all be vastly different. But I do agree there should be something that makes Pathfinder fans feel at home when they play a Pathfinder MMO but I dont think there should be a stick adherence.  



  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 10,938
    PFO failed because a small echo chamber refused to convince Dancey that the crap he was trying to push as a "Minimal Viable Product" was a disaster.  Instead they all looked with greedy eyes to the advantage they would have by Ryan stating they would not wipe at Open Release. Rather, they took to the forums making silly posts explaining "Who PFO Matters" and complaining that "There isn't any way to review the game objectively" after it got destroyed on this site and others.  Hardcore fans always have and always will do more damage to games than the worst detractor.

    "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.

  • goboygogoboygo Member RarePosts: 2,040
    PFO failed because a small echo chamber refused to convince Dancey that the crap he was trying to push as a "Minimal Viable Product" was a disaster.  Instead they all looked with greedy eyes to the advantage they would have by Ryan stating they would not wipe at Open Release. Rather, they took to the forums making silly posts explaining "Who PFO Matters" and complaining that "There isn't any way to review the game objectively" after it got destroyed on this site and others.  Hardcore fans always have and always will do more damage to games than the worst detractor.
    I agree, your hardcore fans in a troubled game are the LAST people you want to listen to, you need to listen to the people that aren't playing your game anymore not the ones left that don't amount to enough revenue to pay your bills.
  • BluddwolfBluddwolf Member UncommonPosts: 355
    Whether they use OGL permitted material or not, the game would have still failed, or for those hanging on, may still fail.

    they built the game up to have PvP at its core, and then set up systems that punished you for PvP.  There was no risk vs reward system in place, so even if you were willing to accept consequences, you gained nothing from PvP.  

    Then there is the God Awful graphics, literally from a 2002 graphic engine pushing at its maximum limits.  

    But of course, the White Knights countered, "Game Play over Graphics".  Yes, that is normally true.  But in PFO's case the game mechanics, even with out their bugs, function like they were created by a Jr. High School computer club after school project.  

    Then we had the marketing of the game.  The pure genius of marketing guru Ryan Dancey, to play word games with consumer and the gaming community, led not only to over charging for his piece of crap, but it being reviewed in its current state of suck.  

    They are supposedly trying to sell this steaming pile to a new group of investors, but that was supposed to happen around March 1.  Now it is nearly two months later, and not a word.  

    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....

  • AndiusMeuridiarAndiusMeuridiar Member UncommonPosts: 91
    I was introduced to the term "groupthink" recently and it immediately recalled my mind to the PFO community. Groupthink goes hand in hand with the idea of a "echo chamber" people are talking about. It's basically when team spirit causes people to dismiss/push out any ideas that go against the general group consensus.

    The example my professor gave was the Challenger disaster and how one of the mechanics actually raised a concern about the exact problem that caused that shuttle to explode in meeting before the launch but was shut down by the rest of the group.

    That's the same thing that happened with Pathfinder Online. Every problem it has faced was predicted. Every failure was addressed while it was still in alpha.

    They chose to give in to group think and listen to their echo chamber. That's how it ended up where it is now.

    ________________________

    The idea you present of selling the current game and reinvesting in a game closer to the IP is pretty darn solid. I do wonder how much the current product would even be worth though. Looking at it from an investment standpoint it's graphically outdated with crap for character model customization on an engine that's already outdated. It's also is a sandbox with no terraforming or even housing customization.

    This is 2016. Compare that to other up and coming sandboxes. Branded as Pathfinder Online or Shadowfall that seems like a game in decline. Not an up and coming title.
Sign In or Register to comment.