Pathfinder - proving what I have been outlining about the MMO industry.

[sebastianosmith]

Watch the pitch video, and listen to him talk about how development costs are too much for a completed MMO so they are going to go with the "minimal viable product" so they can begin monetizing sooner. THis is what I have been illustrating about the current state of MMOs for a while now. The game isnt the product - they release a minimal viable game as the environment for people to use the real product - store bought items/status.

So what? It's a different business model than a subscription-based MMO. One you seem to think is somehow abominable. What is wrong with it, specifically? Does it produce an quantifiably inferior product? If so, how? Why should anyone care how a game (legally) generates revenue if there are people willing to pay for it?

Much ado about nothing once again.

[Bridge_Dweller]

Why should anyone care how a game (legally) generates revenue if there are people willing to pay for it?

You've clearly never played anything made by Cryptic have you?

[Missing_Minds]

You've clearly never played anything made by Cryptic have you?

Cryptic was honestly not to bad, and then they got bought by Perfect World. I stopped playing CO shortly after it became apparently how much monitization they were going to do under PW ownership.

[Bridge_Dweller]

Cryptic was honestly not to bad, and then they got bought by Perfect World. I stopped playing CO shortly after it became apparently how much monitization they were going to do under PW ownership.

My point of reference in Star Trek Online so yeah, the monitization there is absurd.

[Missing_Minds]

My point of reference in Star Trek Online so yeah, the monitization there is absurd.

Pre or post Gem Hadar ship in the grab bag?

[Chai]

So what? It's a different business model than a subscription-based MMO. One you seem to think is somehow abominable. What is wrong with it, specifically? Does it produce an quantifiably inferior product? If so, how? Why should anyone care how a game (legally) generates revenue if there are people willing to pay for it?

Much ado about nothing once again.

Your calling the entire industry moving away from quality "nothing"?

Ive outlined whats wrong with it specifically. As did they, in their video, when they talk about creating a minimum viable product so they can monetize it far sooner, long before it is completed and many of the systems are playable.

You did get one thing right though, and I bolded it. If people are willing to pay to monetize it, whose fault is it, the company, or the folks who throw money at an admittedly mimumum-viable unfinished entity in hopes that the money they threw at it will be used to further their game experience. Think these companies are changing their "minimum viable product" strategy when they have that cash in hand?

[Bridge_Dweller]

Pre or post Gem Hadar ship in the grab bag?

I barely play the game as the ground-based stuff is abysmally stupid and the ship combat is only tolerable in small doses (cut my teeth on Starfleet Command so everything is weak by comparison).

But I've heard about the random boxes you buy that MIGHT have a ship in it and that is disgusting.

[Bridge_Dweller]

You did get one thing right though, and I bolded it. If people are willing to pay to monetize it, whose fault is it, the company, or the folks who throw money at an admittedly mimumum-viable unfinished entity in hopes that the money they threw at it will be used to further their game experience. Think these companies are changing their "minimum viable product" strategy when they have that cash in hand?

Translation for the logic-impaired: This is not a DDO -d0000m thread. It's an industry d000m thread. If thread like what we're seeing in PFO become standard what we'll have left is d000m.

[Thrudh]

Translation for the logic-impaired: This is not a DDO -d0000m thread. It's an industry d000m thread. If thread like what we're seeing in PFO become standard what we'll have left is d000m.

Makes DDO look pretty good though, doesn't it?

[sebastianosmith]

Your calling the entire industry moving away from quality "nothing"?

Ive outlined whats wrong with it specifically. As did they, in their video, when they talk about creating a minimum viable product so they can monetize it far sooner, long before it is completed and many of the systems are playable.

Once again, what qualitative analysis are you offering other than railing against a business model? You have not even attempted to quantify what constitutes a "quality" product other than the exclusion of a microtransaction shop. Your interpretation of "minimum viable product" is colored by your obsession. What does that phrase mean? It could mean a robust framework of code and hardware wherein user-generated content is allowed to flourish which is, if what I am given to understand is accurate, Goblinworks' ultimate goal. It could mean something else entirely, such as what you suggest. I don't know and neither do you.

You did get one thing right though, and I bolded it. If people are willing to pay to monetize it, whose fault is it, the company, or the folks who throw money at an admittedly mimumum-viable unfinished entity in hopes that the money they threw at it will be used to further their game experience. Think these companies are changing their "minimum viable product" strategy when they have that cash in hand?

Allow me to reiterate - So what? If people want to pay for a game that provides them entertainment, no matter how "unfinished" it may be, whose business is it except that of the parties exchanging money? You seem to suggest their approach is intrinsically "wrong" on some ethical level, that the whole idea is a scam perpetrated on the foolish, weak-willed and hopelessly naive. What utter rubbish. Your condescension of anyone who does not hold you views is both blatant and distasteful.

The bottom line is if the model turns a profit, it will succeed. If not, it will fail. That's about all need be said on the matter.

[Bridge_Dweller]

Makes DDO look pretty good though, doesn't it?

Yes, DDO is a zillion times better than these other games. In both content and monitization models.

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

I wonder how much "ownership" that implies also. I mean linkdn and 2nd life. Haven't there been lawsuits over "property" sales?

This just *sounds* like it would be taking that same idea and putting it into a game. I have no idea what actual practice would be.

But that would be an amusing idea (in this case just the game theory). Buy a tavern, and use it to make gold. Other tavern comes up, so you have to work to adjust gold prices and have "events" to get people to show up...

Not something I think I'd want to do.

This is a really good question. Hopefully for their sake, they have a legal fund setup with the kickstarter funds they have accumulated, cause they may need it for a multitude of reasons. Now by "property sales" you mean real estate transactions than that's an area of expertise of mine. In real estate, property deeds are used to convey real property from a seller to a grantee. For a deed to be legally sound, several essentials must exist including the identification of the seller and buyer, and the legal location of the property. There are a litany of issues/challenges that can pop up that can make a title not easily transferable, or even challenge the very ownership of property.

"Ownership" via Goblinworks, works like this:

All this for just $5,000:

* Early Enrollment Access (Month 1, eta July 2014)
* Game Client Download
* New Player Pack (Consumables)
* Alliance Pack (Consumables)
* 3 Months of Game Time
* Goblin Squad Membership
* Access to Alpha Testing (eta May 2014)
* Special Invite to Monster Casting events
* 1 Each of All Daily Deals from the Kickstarter promotion
* Free subscription during Early Enrollment
* Ownership of a Tavern in a high traffic area of the Early Enrollment territory
* An NPC "regular" who will be a permanent fixture in the Tavern
* Use of up to 5 illustrations from Paizo's library of color illustrations as decorations
* Design a sign and name that will appear outside your Tavern
* Six months of upkeep prepaid, and immunity from destruction as long as upkeep remains paid

So basically you own dots, 3 Months of Game Time, access to a fan club (Goblin Squad Membership), access to alpha testing, and specific dots: a Tavern in a corded off "enrollment area" with an npc and sign that supposedly represents you and six months of "upkeep" service", and an imaginary police force to ensure you can't be destroyed.

Legally speaking, I'd compare this to a co-op sales transaction, where you may have ownership, DEPENDING if you respect the rights and privileges you are granted as an "owner", included publicly owned areas. I call these depending dots.

I can envision ALL KINDS of potentially legal quagmires for this game: challenges to "intellectual property", patent and trademark, copyright & moral rights, heck even civil rights. "Owners" will be bound to a pretty strict Code of Conduct and EULA.

This guy sold his dots for $635,000!
http://www.forbes.com/sites/oliverch...tual-property/

Goblinworks is just a company thats trying to test the "GENEROSITY" of the public, see how much monetary value it can put a value on "depending dots", dots for all intents and purposes you do not ever own, free and clear. All this money upfront, with no real guarantee of outcome whatsoever.

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

mispost

[schelsullivan]

That gameplay video looks horrible.

[Chai]

Once again, what qualitative analysis are you offering other than railing against a business model? You have not even attempted to quantify what constitutes a "quality" product other than the exclusion of a microtransaction shop. Your interpretation of "minimum viable product" is colored by your obsession. What does that phrase mean? It could mean a robust framework of code and hardware wherein user-generated content is allowed to flourish which is, if what I am given to understand is accurate, Goblinworks' ultimate goal. It could mean something else entirely, such as what you suggest. I don't know and neither do you.

I didnt need to - they defined that for me, in the video you should have watched a few times now. Had you done so you would realize your claim of " I don't know and neither do you" is completely false. They outline it quite clearly. We do know.

Allow me to reiterate - So what? If people want to pay for a game that provides them entertainment, no matter how "unfinished" it may be, whose business is it except that of the parties exchanging money? You seem to suggest their approach is intrinsically "wrong" on some ethical level, that the whole idea is a scam perpetrated on the foolish, weak-willed and hopelessly naive. What utter rubbish. Your condescension of anyone who does not hold you views is both blatant and distasteful.

Anyone who enjoys MMOs should be concerned by this trend. Your claim of condescension of anyone who does not hold my views, is false. These claims I quoted here are typed up by yourself, not me. It clearly indicates how my position on the issue has to be misconstrued in order to make such a claim, as any objective reader understands.

The bottom line is if the model turns a profit, it will succeed. If not, it will fail. That's about all need be said on the matter.

Bottom line for you maybe. But youre taking the "who cares" stance again, and questioning those who do care, which is ironic. I mean, if not caring about the entire situation, why would you care that someone else does?

Your oversimilified absolute analysis of the situstion where its either one extreme or the other certainly doesnt apply to anyone whose bread and butter comes from this industry. So no, thats not all that needs be said on the matter.

[Chai]

Translation for the logic-impaired: This is not a DDO -d0000m thread. It's an industry d000m thread. If thread like what we're seeing in PFO become standard what we'll have left is d000m.

Incorrect translation. No doom is claimed whatsoever.

Watch the pitch video. It outlines the topic quite nicely.

[Chai]

Makes DDO look pretty good though, doesn't it?

By degree of cost.

Now balance on the other hand....

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

So what? It's a different business model than a subscription-based MMO. One you seem to think is somehow abominable. What is wrong with it, specifically? Does it produce an quantifiably inferior product? If so, how? Why should anyone care how a game (legally) generates revenue if there are people willing to pay for it?

Much ado about nothing once again.

I disagree. The general public is not aware how these kickstarter ventures take place. So many things can and do go wrong.. Out of all kickstarters, the games that actually get finished, and on time is in the low single digits.

Many that help fund these kickstarters are one, two or more years past their promised ship date projections, and still don't get it - and then get no response from the vendor when they ask for updated time-frames. And guess what? There's little recourse because its too late to dispute with their credit card company.

I think that it's an absolutely a disturbing trend, one of the uglier offshoots from the free to play mmo market, and ripe with fraud and potential for fraud. This has fraud written all over it, and whether its legal or not currently, the larger issue looms in the complexity of the internet, internet law, federal and local government laws. This trend will continue to grow, because they are protected by the anonymity of the internet, and the youth and complexity of laws governing online use. In the meantime, many more of the innocent public will continue to be taken for fools.

[Ancient]

You did get one thing right though, and I bolded it. If people are willing to pay to monetize it, whose fault is it, the company, or the folks who throw money at an admittedly mimumum-viable unfinished entity in hopes that the money they threw at it will be used to further their game experience. Think these companies are changing their "minimum viable product" strategy when they have that cash in hand?

This minimum viable product sounds a lot like agile software development makes its way to MMOs. While agile has some good features, it has a lot of issues that line up with recent complaints. Small units of work means lots of shiny new features that are then abandoned, attempts to shorten development cycles leads to an over-reliance on automated testing and quality issues, allowing developers to own technology without considering users leads to stuff installed on your machine you do not want.

[sebastianosmith]

I didnt need to - they defined that for me, in the video you should have watched a few times now. Had you done so you would realize your claim of " I don't know and neither do you" is completely false. They outline it quite clearly. We do know.

You don't need to define what you mean by a quality product? They defined it for you? I bet you're a big fan of the line item veto movement.

You are simply projecting your bias on "minimum viable product" when defining it to mean "unfinished". You see what you want to see.

Anyone who enjoys MMOs should be concerned by this trend. Your claim of condescension of anyone who does not hold my views, is false. These claims I quoted here are typed up by yourself, not me. It clearly indicates how my position on the issue has to be misconstrued in order to make such a claim, as any objective reader understands.

Try not to get too much mud on that gleaming, white charger you got there while saving the MMO industry from itself.

You are condescending. You can claim it's false all the livelong day and that won't make it so. Your entire tone and choice of words in this and many, many other posts regarding what you consider to be aberrations from your ideal gaming world make you out to be an enlightened prophet leading the blind, unwilling and ignorant masses into a promised land of MMO Nirvana. Condescending? That was being polite.

Bottom line for you maybe. But youre taking the "who cares" stance again, and questioning those who do care, which is ironic. I mean, if not caring about the entire situation, why would you care that someone else does?

Yeah, I'm not walking down the this well worn path. I did not use "Who cares" anywhere in this thread (outside this exemplar). I did use "So what" in the context of a company attempting to introduce a novel, for the industry in question, approach to revenue generation. I did so because the news is not all that important to the final outcome. We have few details on how monetization will take place and the few we do have are present in a context intended for potential investors. You once again interpret words to fit only your narrative.

Your oversimilified absolute analysis of the situstion where its either one extreme or the other certainly doesnt apply to anyone whose bread and butter comes from this industry. So no, thats not all that needs be said on the matter.

Ah, my old friend Oversimplified Absolute. You always seem to appear whenever an argument needs to be made to seem more centrist and reasonable. You should eat OA - You're looking thin.

Let me ask you some things, Chai - Not that I expect answers this time either.

What do you hope to accomplish with your protestations and warnings?

Are you in a position to actually affect change in the industry and, if so, how/why have/haven't you?

What does your ideal MMO/Game entail besides the generic "MAOR CONTENT" claim.

I await your answers, not that expect any pertaining to my questions mind you.