Pathfinder Online : CEO Presentation Video

Jul 31,2012 - by 17

Ryan Dancey, CEO of Goblinworks talks about the Pathfinder Online fantasy sandbox MMO at PaizoCon in 2012. All I will say is that Mr. Dancey makes some very solid and valid remarks when it comes to my ideas of “the perfect MMORPG”. Can’t wait to read or learn more about Pathfinder Online.




Rumors have it that Cpt. BetaCake was once a mere mortal. In human years he would be 28 years old. Nowadays, he finds peace in sharing gaming news and leaks.

  • Killuminati

    nice presentation. Looking forward to learning more about this game now that I’ve seen this,

  • scott

    Sounds nice in theory, I miss sandbox style play since the old days of galaxies.

  • Please succeed!

    I fully support this game if they can revolutionize the MMO space. Here’s the hurtle, getting the jerks to play a game that isnt laid out for them.

  • Dawn

    I’m keeping an eye on this.

  • 1nsane

    The idea is interesting, the thing that worries me though, is the fact that “in the end” you will 2 have 2 nations fighting over control of the “hardest” dungeons. Sounds a bit too much faction based to me.

    Lets hope they dont fall for the trap that ALL MMORPG’s have fallen for lately. Dont make a PvE/PvP/RPPvE etc servers. Make 1 game, with 1 type of server, thats it!

    • BetaCake

      Totally agree. I’m sick and tired of companies catering to individuals or minorities. If you don’t want to PvP, leave it to those who want to do it. Hire them to protect you. Give them a reason to play the game.

      • Wegotstory

        I usually agree with you Beta.

        But if you went with 1 server type and the majority. The server would most likely end up being PVE. As most games have far more PVE than PVP servers. WOW probably has 7 PVE servers to 3 PVP servers.

        Also paying a PVP person to defend you would be pointless. As there is no way they would follow you around all the time and defend you. They would probably just take your cash and run. And since they like PVP and your already flagged. They would gank you when they got bored.

        I do agree with 1 server though. I think TESO using DAOC’s 3 faction area capture mechanic is good. As it gives the pvp types tons of pvp and a capture mechanic. But a game with a huge EQ world and pve raid end game
        would be nice to. The best of both world’s.

        As you said in the end, give them a reason to play the game. Well them is all the player types. And DAOC/Warhammer/AOC show if you cater to just pvp, you still end up like all the other MMO’s, besides WOW, and that is just a niche.

        • Infrantic

          I think one of the great ways of making it work with one server type, is by having everyone basically start neutral. You can then, either stay neutral for however long you please, or declare a faction and be part of that for as long as you like. That’s the great thing about sandbox type games, they don’t force you to make choices, but offer the possibilities for you to make them yourself.

          • Infrantic

            (And yes, you can tell I’m heavily SWG inspired in my sandbox-thinking, but that’s merely because that’s the best sandbox-type mmo I’ve ever played myself.)

  • Wegotstory

    I agree with his definition of a Sandbox being a game where you can do whatever you want. And player driven.

    But I disagree with the pvp aspect. As if you don’t want to pvp, obviously that is not doing whatever you want.

    His definition just seems to be self serving for his push for funding. As he puts Warhammer as a themepark. When it was a player driven RVR , faction against faction RVR, city capture game. It had very weak PVE, and no end game PVE raiding. Ultimately IMO it’s lack of pve and end game pve raiding is why it quickly lost subs. As on most servers, one faction quickly dominated. Which led to many on the other faction killing their toons and joining a winning faction. No one to fight. Nothing else to do. Everyone leaves the game. IMO Warhammer fits his categorization of sandbox more than his definition of themepark. Which makes his sales data demo a moot point.

    I view EQ as a sandbox. As I could do whatever I wanted. I didn’t have to quest. I could do all crafts. I could become a player killer or join a pvp server if that is what I wanted. And it was hugely player driven. As most needed to group to level and end game.

  • Wegotstory

    I’m happy to see they are pushing for this game but several things worry me.

    1. The biggest worry is the team seems to be Hasbro/Wizard of the Coast people. Then those people are teamed with former Lucas Arts people? I’m sorry but that is too vague. Are they Galaxies Sony people ? Galaxies people would fit my definition of a sanbox, because of it’s size and stuff you could do. But that was basically EQ in a Star Wars setting IMO. Or are they SWTOR people? If it is SWTOR then the design team would seem way to themepark oriented IMO. The part about making the most active players part of their “team” smells like SWTOR speak to me. They did this before SWTOR came out. And apparently they brought in the wrong people. As the game launched without half the features players in 2012 expected. I’m still playing SWTOR, but a DDO/SWTOR team would scare my wallet greatly. And it would make my clone radar go off the chart.

    2. Isn’t this game already made and about to come out? I haven’t had the honor of testing Archeage. But everything this guy described seems to be Archeage. Which means if Archeage releases in the west. Pathfinder will come out 4 years after Archeage has shown what it has to offer.

    3. He is pitching a sandbox. Which ironically seems to be what Archeage. And IMO and hopes EQ next will be. According to his PVP player driven aspect, TESO will also be kind of a pvp RVR sandbox. So Pathfinder may becoming into a market that is over saturated with Sandboxes at the time. And honestly if Archeage and EQ next can’t help me get my sandbox on. I would be cautious about trying another for a bit.

    4. I played EQ, and I look forward to it’s huge world before the nexus and such again in EQ next. I am also drooling over Archeage’s huge world and not solely quest driven content. But what this guy describes again seems to me to be like EQ. I have no problem with a good game being “grindy”. But his “training” system seemed to be nothing but a grind. 6 weeks of rat killing? really? I know it was just an example. But that seems to be more grind then even the most grinding game out there.

    Again I hope this game is everything the guy is pitching. Though the team involved and the way the market is currently going. Makes me a little concerned.

  • Wegotstory

    I also think Age of Conan more closely fit in with HIS sandbox definition. As when I played it, it was on a pvp server, and it was everyone ganking everyone all the time.

    It’s drop on the sales chart IMO was due to the fact it launched with way way too many bugs.

    So his chart IMO just showed that it’s either time for games to take the what is old is new approach. Or create something totally unique. He seems to be pitching for the what is old is new approach. I think he is correct. I just am wondering if Archeage, EQ next and TESO have already beaten him to the pitch.

  • Wegotstory

    Oh and Betacake. Either way. Thanks for keeping us informed on the latest games!

    • BetaCake

      You don’t need to thank me. I’m enjoying myself keeping the website updated. :)

  • Novas

    So to have access to the “very hardest dungeons” and the “most advanced” abilities, you HAVE TO join up with a settlement. That’s forcing players to join one. And forcing players to do things alienates them. Plus, there are tons of players who like to play by themselves. They would need to revise those ideas if they want to be successful.

  • cthulhupsawn82

    Is he saying they are going a skill based route rather than having
    classes? Having a dungeons and dragons game without classes is worse
    than having one without dungeons or dragons. I am also scared of his “sandbox” idea and focus on player interaction over interaction with the environment. D&D has always been a pure PVE game.

    Then there will probably bee raids. Oh well, I guess a game doesn’t have to stay true to source material to be good. I am just so disappointed to hear about a new D&D MMO and then learn it will probably be nothing like D&D.

  • Novas

    Killuminati, there is a big difference between getting the “best items” in a game, and having access to all of the content or abilities/skills for a character. So lets say you join a large settlement, and thus have access to the best abilities/skills in the game. And me, for example, decide not to join a settlement and only have access to 80% of the abilities/skills in the game. We both decide to engage in PvP. Because you are with a settlement, and I am not, you blow me away with some awesome skills that I don’t have access to. Do you think that is fair? I would suffice that many people wouldn’t consider that fair, especially if I am a paying customer. You should also have the option of joining a group/PUG to do the hardest dungeons. They didn’t specifically mention that you could do a PUG in their game. It was one of the bullets in a slide in the video though. We all know that you get the “best items” in WoW by joining raid groups. Could be the same exact thing for this game. No one would suffer as long as it wasn’t forced by the game company to join a guild to do so.

© 2013 BetaCake : MMO news and leaks. Served as intended. Fresh.. All rights reserved.
Back to top