Cookies Disclaimer

I agree Our site saves small pieces of text information (cookies) on your device in order to authenticate logins, deliver better content and provide statistical analysis. You can adjust your browser settings to prevent our site from using cookies, but doing so will prevent some aspects of the site from functioning properly.

delete

Doc
My suspicion is that Ryan and Lisa are not trying to make the same kind of game.
Brighthaven Leader
I don't think I disagree with you, Doc.
Brighthaven is a Neutral Good settlement focused on defending its citizens and its allies from negative fringe based PvP (Player Killing and Griefing) while striving to become a large and shining beacon for Good. Whether you wish to benefit from this protection or you love PvP and wish to assist in providing this protection, Brighthaven aims to be the home and support center for you!
Bringslite
Tyv Blodvaerd of Aragon
Bringslite
Cheatle for TEO
I think Dreaden could have put it nicer, but there is a very real reasons why several websites have started to review the game. Dancey might have been trying to start some kind of revolution, but I don't think its catching on.

A lot of this has to do with the pricing. If there was never a sub, until OE, just a box price I think a lot of the negativity wouldn't have spread so far, and thus the chain of events that has occurred. A box price could have been played off as getting the game and testing access, as some companies do, but we have what we have at this point, no going back.

This whole branch of discussion has to deal with Devs playing in their product after the game has launched. Should GW decide that they should not play in the game if/when it is launched?

If yes:

Should GW not play PfO (to gleem 1st hand looks) if the public decides the game is launched, even though it isn't launched? What else should they change… from among all the comments about what they should change from "The Public" opinion either because "it is launched" or because it is a good idea to do everything that people (who don't even play) say you should do with your game?

The Devs should play on the test server, that is what a test server is for. Does anyone actually know that around here? A TEST SERVER is used to TEST the game mechanics, server stability, patches BEFORE release, etc etc… So that they don't break stuff on the Live server or create negative perceptions of favoritism / impropriety.

As I stated earlier, on the Live Server.. "Observe", "Inquire" and "Moderate" for clarity, "Moderate" refers to on the spot fixes like /unstuck or other quick solutions for glitches / bugs.

At least it did not appear that the devs engaged in PVP to thwart th PVP attacks on the escalation participants, however simply assisting during the escalation against the Mobs is giving benefit to those players.

I don't see how they could get a grip on how the game feels if they are not "in the game" that is being played. That seems like a good reason to be in there. Pretty sure that they already spend time in the test server.

Split hairs if you like. It still doesn't amount to anything that other (non Dev) players could have done. Every group down there was composed of multiple settlements. I was grouped with a few Golgothan's myself.

There comes a time (especially when you are trying something new or controversial) that you have to either let outside, non participating people direct what you are doing or do what you think will make the project work. There isn't a perfect model for MMOs. Many would be more successful if there was.
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Dreaden
Tyv Blodvaerd of Aragon
Bringslite
Cheatle for TEO
I think Dreaden could have put it nicer, but there is a very real reasons why several websites have started to review the game. Dancey might have been trying to start some kind of revolution, but I don't think its catching on.

A lot of this has to do with the pricing. If there was never a sub, until OE, just a box price I think a lot of the negativity wouldn't have spread so far, and thus the chain of events that has occurred. A box price could have been played off as getting the game and testing access, as some companies do, but we have what we have at this point, no going back.

This whole branch of discussion has to deal with Devs playing in their product after the game has launched. Should GW decide that they should not play in the game if/when it is launched?

If yes:

Should GW not play PfO (to gleem 1st hand looks) if the public decides the game is launched, even though it isn't launched? What else should they change… from among all the comments about what they should change from "The Public" opinion either because "it is launched" or because it is a good idea to do everything that people (who don't even play) say you should do with your game?

The Devs should play on the test server, that is what a test server is for. Does anyone actually know that around here? A TEST SERVER is used to TEST the game mechanics, server stability, patches BEFORE release, etc etc… So that they don't break stuff on the Live server or create negative perceptions of favoritism / impropriety.

As I stated earlier, on the Live Server.. "Observe", "Inquire" and "Moderate" for clarity, "Moderate" refers to on the spot fixes like /unstuck or other quick solutions for glitches / bugs.

At least it did not appear that the devs engaged in PVP to thwart th PVP attacks on the escalation participants, however simply assisting during the escalation against the Mobs is giving benefit to those players.
Fwiw, at gencon Lisa was probing EoX members about Xycor's activities during the demo. I'm not sure the specifics of the conversation but appatently it was brought up multiple times.
Stilachio Thrax
Dreaden
It's all about PR and reaching population critical mass, for the health of the game. The vast majority of mmorpg gamers are veterans of the genre and can spot the warning signs a mile away. Open in game dev interaction being one warning sign. Sub for unfinished product is another, this is possibly the biggest. GW says game is unfinished, but insists on charging sub and not having wipe. The only reason this works is the exp model and players willingness to support a unfinished product for an advantage over future players.

Every MMO I've ever played has had the Devs playing on the live servers in some capacity. Usually it involves a publicly known character who is around for events and the occasional ingame Q&A, and private characters that play the game with regular players who generally don't know its a dev on the other end. No matter how successful the MMO is or isn't, I haven't found a single exception to that.

GW has their own company tied to a politically neutral settlement for support. Seems pretty transparent to me, and I think people are making it into some kind of conspiracy to further their own agendas. The only thing I'd recommend GW do is spend some time playing in other parts of the map. The PFU area is but a sliver of what happens in game. I'd like to see them experience playing in the south during the "Forever War", or in the North and West to get a better handle on the playerbase.

Regarding the sub and wipe. If you don't like the sub, don't play. Its pretty simple. I know exactly what I'm getting and not getting by subbing right now, and made the decision it was worth it. The minute that calculus changes, I'll re-evaluate.

With the wipe, there are ALWAYS going to be an advantage to playing longer, no matter when you start. If you wipe everything today, you'll have an advantage over someone who starts 6 months from now- are you going to wipe again so they start on a level playing field? At least with this set up, diminishing returns and exponentially larger XP costs for training make it possible for newcomers to field competent characters in 2-3 months. All this wipe nonsense reminds me of the new pilots in SWG that constantly whined about not having ship parts that took vet pilots YEARS to build and demanded those parts get nerfed or they be given comparable parts (despite being shown time and again they could build a competitive ship with a mix of crafted and easily available RE parts in less than a week and some credits).
Virtus et Honor

Steward of Ozem's Vigil, Lord Commander of the Argyraspides Iomedais
Dreaden
Stilachio Thrax
Dreaden
It's all about PR and reaching population critical mass, for the health of the game. The vast majority of mmorpg gamers are veterans of the genre and can spot the warning signs a mile away. Open in game dev interaction being one warning sign. Sub for unfinished product is another, this is possibly the biggest. GW says game is unfinished, but insists on charging sub and not having wipe. The only reason this works is the exp model and players willingness to support a unfinished product for an advantage over future players.

Every MMO I've ever played has had the Devs playing on the live servers in some capacity. Usually it involves a publicly known character who is around for events and the occasional ingame Q&A, and private characters that play the game with regular players who generally don't know its a dev on the other end. No matter how successful the MMO is or isn't, I haven't found a single exception to that.

GW has their own company tied to a politically neutral settlement for support. Seems pretty transparent to me, and I think people are making it into some kind of conspiracy to further their own agendas. The only thing I'd recommend GW do is spend some time playing in other parts of the map. The PFU area is but a sliver of what happens in game. I'd like to see them experience playing in the south during the "Forever War", or in the North and West to get a better handle on the playerbase.

Regarding the sub and wipe. If you don't like the sub, don't play. Its pretty simple. I know exactly what I'm getting and not getting by subbing right now, and made the decision it was worth it. The minute that calculus changes, I'll re-evaluate.

With the wipe, there are ALWAYS going to be an advantage to playing longer, no matter when you start. If you wipe everything today, you'll have an advantage over someone who starts 6 months from now- are you going to wipe again so they start on a level playing field? At least with this set up, diminishing returns and exponentially larger XP costs for training make it possible for newcomers to field competent characters in 2-3 months. All this wipe nonsense reminds me of the new pilots in SWG that constantly whined about not having ship parts that took vet pilots YEARS to build and demanded those parts get nerfed or they be given comparable parts (despite being shown time and again they could build a competitive ship with a mix of crafted and easily available RE parts in less than a week and some credits).
The difference is the game is not worth paying for now, let alone January. Ask yourself this question, would you pay a sub if exp and items were going to be wiped? If yes, congratulations you care a lot about PFO and want to help fund/develop it. If not, you care about getting a leg up on future players more than the health of the game. Plain and simple.
Caldeathe Baequiannia
I did pay a sub before the wipe, it was just a one-time, really cheap sub, of $100.00 for the first two years of not getting to play.

People who use the words "not worth" in arguments almost always forget that each of us gets to decide what's worth it for ourselves.
To reach me, email d20rpg@gmail.com
Lee Hammock
Just to let you guys know our internal guidelines for playing characters on live:

1. Our characters that we are actually playing with have no GM powers. That's why some times you'll see us tell someone who needs help to wait a minute while we jump on another account. We have concrete rules that we cannot use any GM commands while playing, or really for anything that could advantage our characters. Everything we craft, kill, earn, etc, we do with the same tools as anyone else. Otherwise our playing to see the real player experience would be pointless.
2. We don't PvP except in self-defense or situations where we think its for the good of the community. If I see someone killing new players I will step in to stop them with my limited skills (what can I say, I play a crafter and a gatherer), but we will not get involved in taking holdings/outposts, etc.
3. Everyone who plays knows they represent the company so we have to be polite, helpful, etc.

We've had a lot of go-arounds internally about how to handle playing in game, but we figured being open about our characters and aligning with a settlement as neutral as possible would be the best idea. The information and experience we've gotten from time in the game has been literally invaluable. Whole systems have changed due to the time we've spent in game, and universally for the better. We've tried to make it as transparent as possible a process (we're all in the same company, we're all part of PFU, I've announced the names of all my characters in Keepside chats personally). Internally we have real and serious internal repercussions for anyone who breaks our rules or brings shame on the house of Goblinworks.




Stilachio Thrax
Dreaden
The difference is the game is not worth paying for now, let alone January. Ask yourself this question, would you pay a sub if exp and items were going to be wiped? If yes, congratulations you care a lot about PFO and want to help fund/develop it. If not, you care about getting a leg up on future players more than the health of the game. Plain and simple.

In your opinion…which is no more valid or important than anyone else's here. You don't get to say what is worth it for other people, only yourself. Would I still subscribe if there was a wipe? Probably. But then we are also talking about the devs backsliding on a pretty important thing they promised. While the XP wipe in and of itself isn't make or break for me, breaking their word potentially is.

But you still haven't answered how wiping now (or at OE or whenever) to level the playing field is somehow a different situation than wiping at OE + 1 year, when OE day 1 people have a year advantage on new players. Do you want to wipe XP every year, so everyone is the same? Are there any games out there that do that? I can't think of one, yet I know of one very successful example that does the same XP system as PFO, and that "advantage" you think vets will have somehow has never been a problem.
Virtus et Honor

Steward of Ozem's Vigil, Lord Commander of the Argyraspides Iomedais
Yrme
Stilachio Thrax
Do you want to wipe XP every year, so everyone is the same? Are there any games out there that do that? I can't think of one, yet I know of one very successful example that does the same XP system as PFO, and that "advantage" you think vets will have somehow has never been a problem.

A Tale in the Desert wiped occasionally, by design. The game was set in ancient Egypt and would run for two years or so with the challenge to the players of building seven Wonders. Then the game would wipe - the repeating cycle of life and death, you know - and players would start over. They'd have some recognition like titles, from past tales, but nothing material. It was a niche game, perhaps because of the wipes or other things about the design.
At some point, crowdforging suggestions seem to be like fan fiction. Some good, some bad, some repetitious and predictable. But maybe there are some gems out there.
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post