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.

Pathfinder Online will be ending operations on November 28, 2021. For more details please visit our FAQ.

Is the Game Dying? Ideas for fixes?

Azure_Zero
Right Now the game is Dying as many players are moving on.

As I can see in-game chat that some more are not going to re-sub, and the game's new player retention is next to non-existant.

Right Now I think the game is dying cause that world is TOO BIG, and everyone has everything at hand with no challenges over resources, and ALL groups are extremely stagnant due to VERY POOR reward for PVP.

To fix this Issue I think the game map needs to Shrink A LOT, like to less then 1/4th it's current size, heck we could use the Test server as a base template for a quick rebuild.
As for the current Alliances of settlements, they will all be squished down to ONLY ONE settlement, so there should only be about 4-5 settlements. Each new settlement will have a Monster hex nearby that HAS UNIQUE resources, with a few extra monster hexes about.
There should be a shortage of hexes so EVERY SETTLEMENT CAN NOT BE +5 with Level 20 support, at best Every settlement should be able to run as a +3 settlement with level 16 support.

All ACTIVE companies would be transferred to the New map and attached to the correct settlement, with all there Max influence in tow.
The Settlement's buildings will be chosen based on agreement by ALL settlement leaders in the alliance with either a current company chosen or a new one set as founding the settlement.
All the Buildings will start at +3 with a +4 Keep, along two other buildings being +4.
Every settlement will get enough materials to make 18 +3 Holdings and 2 +3 Outposts as to quickly get their holdings up.
With the inner Core 6 and Outer core 12 being the settlement's hexes for about a month so everyone can get their holdings and outposts up though outer,cores that are shared are first come first served, after the month is up outer core 12 are up for the taking by ambitious settlements.
malmuerta
This is not a fix. This would be an admission of defeat. I suggest we leave the map alone and continue working on the roadmap as proposed. A better game will bring people back and retain newcomers.
Azure_Zero
Sorry, but the game now is so stagnant and empty that staying ON COURSE is a kin to being on the Titanic as it is sinking and saying "Everything is fine."

To Save the Game a MAJOR shake up has to happen that breaks the stagnation and also causes groups to interact with each other more.
Maxen
While I don’t disagree that the game has stagnated, let’s not forget that it is still Early Enrollment. The biggest failing right now, and IMO the reason no one new is subbing, is because no one wants to pay $15 for a game that is not in Open Enrollment. Yes, the major systems are in place, but it is not ready for Prime Time. Too much for polish stil needs to occur (most notably having RIVERS in the River Kingdoms, lol.)

I agree with you Azure that something needs to be done to shake things up a little. But fully finishing this game and getting it into OE status should be the main focus. Not focusing on bandaids.
malmuerta
^ +1
Azure_Zero
Maxen
While I don’t disagree that the game has stagnated, let’s not forget that it is still Early Enrollment. The biggest failing right now, and IMO the reason no one new is subbing, is because no one wants to pay $15 for a game that is not in Open Enrollment. Yes, the major systems are in place, but it is not ready for Prime Time. Too much for polish still needs to occur (most notably having RIVERS in the River Kingdoms, lol.)

I agree with you Azure that something needs to be done to shake things up a little. But fully finishing this game and getting it into OE status should be the main focus. Not focusing on bandaids.

And One of the reasons no one new is subbing is Because the game feels empty and void of life, this another reason that the map NEEDS to shrink a lot.
What good is getting near to Finishing the game when there are No players left playing it, the answer is nothing.
If nothing shakes things Up out of stagnation Now to stop the loss of the current player base, the game will be dead in less then three years if we can't retain the old and new players.

The Game itself needs more then a little shake up, it needs a big shake up that forces interaction(s) between groups to stop any stagnation from happening.
Maxen
It’s entirely possible that no one who plays today will be around when they go to OE. At this rate of attrition, that’s more and more likely. Is that common? Not really. The purpose of opening a game to Alpha, Beta, Early Enrollment players (whatever you want to call them) is to build momentum to full release and have an established player-base. But that’s not a requirement. If you make a game worth paying for, players will come.

The three biggest challenges PfO has working against it are 1) funding 2) finishing the game to full release and 3) overcoming the negative publicity that it faced from the Days of Ryan. I don’t believe any amount of tinkering with the size of the map is going to bring in enough subs to make a dent in development costs. They need a major influx of capital. Regarding publicity, current and past players have already made up their mind about this game. They either already folded or they are all in. Still, some level of rebranding may need to occur.

With the limited resources PfO has at its disposal, they are better off finishing the game as quickly as possible and then focusing their marketing efforts on bringing in a new host of players.
Azure_Zero
I do agree that funding is a big issue, along with needing to get to Full Release.
But we have a problem, right now the only ones funding the game are us old players, and new players are not retained.
So the best thing to do is keep the old players playing and get things to the point new player(s) would want to join.

Now Shrinking the map would cut server costs though, and with the extra money they could funnel it into development.
The shrunken size would lead to more interaction among players and make the game feel more alive then a empty void where you are the only one.
Bringslite
Shrinking the map:

I have toyed with this idea as well. Always I come to the conclusion that it would require a great deal of sacrifice of much work by many players who have stuck through the game so far. Personally I would be willing to consider it but I am a person not adverse to MAJOR adjustment. I am not really sure that all that previous work would so easily be trashed by many other players who have worked so hard. Lots of time (which is money) and effort went into all the advanced settlements to get where they are.

It would not be very fair to basically take all of that away nor do I guess that a plan could be devised to do it that most would agree to. With so many bound to end in disagreement over who loses the most through a move like this, I wouldn't be surprised seeing it backfire and cause much more "quitting in frustration" than doing good.

This game needs more than a shrunken "player proximity" fix for PVP. Much more.

I do agree that a major shake up is needed. I think they are doing that but it will take time. IMO, true FTP would be better, with a robust alternative cash shop. Unless Paizo really feels they can hold on until the game can offer a more full "modernish" feature filled game.
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Bringslite
Addendum:

So that I am more clear. I am not opposed personally to Azure's idea. I would be fine if some adjustments were made and we all lived in Thornkeep. We could PVP outside safe zones and wrestle over holdings until OE.

One problem (flaw IMO) was assuming that the game would be so popular that there would be a waiting list of players to "get in". Even with such a risky vulnerable financial plan, such divergence from anything "PFRPG like" and even much feedback from PFRPG players against much of the premise of the game.

But we all dream big and want to be prepared for big. So the world was made big. Unfortunately, the players never really came (or stuck around) to justify the world size. Hindsight is a funny thing.

Too bad that we couldn't have all started and been made to live in Thornkeep until OE. We could have built holdings, etc.. out in the wilds, fought over them out in the wilds and contested to establish settlements with ALL the players at the same time. Better, IMO, than appearing as invincible Lords/Ladies supremely established and invincible to new players at OE.
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post