Caliya
Strong in the Force
People fight to gain things they can't take with them in the end
Posts: 2,121
|
Post by Caliya on Dec 24, 2015 12:57:02 GMT
For the Steam holiday sales, you can earn mystery cards, up to 3 per day, if you look at queued games on sale. I saw Team Fortress 2 listed, released in 2007 and is free to play - a well known game many of us know or have played. And its rating is 95% "Overwhelmingly Positive" out of more than 314,000 reviews.
I asked my husband, how is that even possible? You must be drawn to the game to want to buy it, and when you do, your expectations are met.
He agreed, and said, this is what happens when you misrepresent a game, or lie to people to get them to buy in. If they had accurately described the game, I would not have bought in, and that would have been one less negative review. And it really seems the same for a majority of negative reviewers. Thus, the comparison to "this is not UO's, or even Ultima's, spiritual successor" as was touted in the buy-in sales.
People bitch saying, "We don't want another UO! So don't even ask for it!"
Then don't try to sell the game as an Ultima and Ultima Online spiritual successor.
If they would have explained, from the very beginning, it was a completely different concept from past RG games, and that it would have the kind of buy-ins it has now, most people would've never invested from the start. I know I wouldn't have. And even if I would have, I would not have anticipated it to be at least vaguely familiar to game concept of UO.
There are things about SotA that are nice, even beautiful. It's not even that it's taking so long to finish, or that it needs core systems in place. It's just that it's not developed into the kind of game most people want. Even the whales are bailing ship.
All this has helped me to see, what do I really want in a game? Why do I like certain games? I know the games I'm drawn to, but have never really thought about why until now. I clearly know why games like SotA are not what I want. But what do we want? If developers are constantly pulled into feature creep instead of the core game development, they reveal they also don't know what they want, because they don't know what consumers want. You have to know what niche you want to capture, and they really missed the mark with this one, for an awful lot of people.
|
|
|
Post by chodekiller on Dec 27, 2015 1:10:22 GMT
They played both Ultima and UO fans alike. richard garriott especially was and is the biggest piece of shit in this as he would say one thing to those in it for pure ultima regarding the focus of the game, then go on UO freeshards and say entirely different things. What's really fucked is that in the end nothing he said was really true. The game created here is not remotely close to anything he ever talked about, mainly cause he doesn't actually work on the game. So everyone who put their money into a ultima and uo successor was lied to, duped and ripped off.
|
|
titsup
Strong in the Force
Posts: 819
|
Post by titsup on Dec 27, 2015 3:42:14 GMT
He agreed, and said, this is what happens when you misrepresent a game, or lie to people to get them to buy in. If they had accurately described the game, I would not have bought in, and that would have been one less negative review. And it really seems the same for a majority of negative reviewers. Thus, the comparison to "this is not UO's, or even Ultima's, spiritual successor" as was touted in the buy-in sales. People bitch saying, "We don't want another UO! So don't even ask for it!" Then don't try to sell the game as an Ultima and Ultima Online spiritual successor. If they would have explained, from the very beginning, it was a completely different concept from past RG games, and that it would have the kind of buy-ins it has now, most people would've never invested from the start. I know I wouldn't have. And even if I would have, I would not have anticipated it to be at least vaguely familiar to game concept of UO. I think this is really a reflection of how they've run the whole project. They won't commit to any one thing that might alienate an audience. Its both single player and multiplayer. Its both mmo and selective multiplayer. What would you like this game to be? That's what it is! You want it to be a successor to Ultima I-IX, well it is! Want it to be one to UO, you got it! Want it to be a new game with little influence from those? Its that too! Its everything you can think of. Its all games in one. It can't be pegged down, its in a category by itself because there are no categories for something so paradigm smashing. No one can define 'spiritual successor'. It leaves the interpreting on the backer, not them. They never had to define exactly how this game would relate to those games. They simply had to throw out a phrase and let people make assumptions as to what that meant. They left players to define what a spiritual successor was for themselves and it has created a lot of animosity from those who had a different, completely valid, interpretation of what a spiritual successor to those games would be.
|
|
calico
Strong in the Force
Posts: 299
|
Post by calico on Jan 2, 2016 1:55:16 GMT
They played both Ultima and UO fans alike. richard garriott especially was and is the biggest piece of shit in this as he would say one thing to those in it for pure ultima regarding the focus of the game, then go on UO freeshards and say entirely different things. What's really fucked is that in the end nothing he said was really true. The game created here is not remotely close to anything he ever talked about, mainly cause he doesn't actually work on the game. So everyone who put their money into a ultima and uo successor was lied to, duped and ripped off. This is what gets me. So many times he double talked what the game actually was. At the end, it is much closer to UO then any Ultima. The sad thing is most UO fans don't even understand when people say it isn't like the original ultima's because they have no idea what they were like or just how badly it was butchered to make UO.
|
|
|
Post by Membrane_on_Vacation on Jan 2, 2016 2:16:39 GMT
They played both Ultima and UO fans alike. richard garriott especially was and is the biggest piece of shit in this as he would say one thing to those in it for pure ultima regarding the focus of the game, then go on UO freeshards and say entirely different things. What's really fucked is that in the end nothing he said was really true. The game created here is not remotely close to anything he ever talked about, mainly cause he doesn't actually work on the game. So everyone who put their money into a ultima and uo successor was lied to, duped and ripped off. This is what gets me. So many times he double talked what the game actually was. At the end, it is much closer to UO then any Ultima. The sad thing is most UO fans don't even understand when people say it isn't like the original ultima's because they have no idea what they were like or just how badly it was butchered to make UO. Ignorance is bliss in that case eh? A lot of them feign to not know what Ultima was as well, some just plain don't care. This has turned into UO2, but even a more trammel version of it if you could have ever imagined. Fucking spells without regs, what kind of Ultima is this again? Answer: FAKE
|
|
|
Post by Membrane_on_Vacation on Jan 10, 2016 13:38:19 GMT
I have deleted my ticked positive review.
|
|
dodgy
Strong in the Force
Posts: 1,171
|
Post by dodgy on Jan 10, 2016 14:29:45 GMT
How did UO butcher Ultima series
fark me
I would never of played UO if I hadnt played Ultima
Dont say such stupid shit
And this isnt UO2
|
|
|
Post by Membrane_on_Vacation on Jan 10, 2016 15:49:49 GMT
How did UO butcher Ultima series
|
|
calico
Strong in the Force
Posts: 299
|
Post by calico on Jan 10, 2016 15:57:43 GMT
How did UO butcher Ultima series fark me I would never of played UO if I hadnt played Ultima Dont say such stupid shit And this isnt UO2 UO was a shell of what the ultima's were....NPC's? Who needs those unless they sell you something....A virtue wheel...The whole well thought out world gone for a "PVP centric" virtual world. I played both, even from the start the beta for UO felt nothing like what I came to love in the ultima series. The towns were well crafted and had history in the originals, UO used them as hubs with very little resemblance to Ultima. I think UO did a fine job of a fantasy online world, but a poor ultima.
|
|
dodgy
Strong in the Force
Posts: 1,171
|
Post by dodgy on Jan 10, 2016 16:43:19 GMT
Meh strong disagree
early UO was very ultima to me
Yeah NPCs were shallow but basicly it felt like Ultima but with humans in it.
Fuck no one was playing UO by the time that steam punk shit appeared. Plus they needed to put the work on UO2 somewhere
|
|
calico
Strong in the Force
Posts: 299
|
Post by calico on Jan 10, 2016 18:34:46 GMT
Meh strong disagree early UO was very ultima to me Yeah NPCs were shallow but basicly it felt like Ultima but with humans in it. Fuck no one was playing UO by the time that steam punk shit appeared. Plus they needed to put the work on UO2 somewhere You can strongly disagree but I am not alone in that assessment.... I can't remember a single npc worth anything more then a store from the early days, in face many state the open pvp world was the ultimate thing that set it apart from the later days. PVP seemed to run the game, which seems weird in a world that was supposed to be about the virtues. It's hard to find many commonalities between it and ultima 7 for instance.
|
|
|
Post by Membrane_on_Vacation on Jan 11, 2016 1:12:43 GMT
^ What was said above. I am not personally sledging UO as a whole, just in terms of where it relates to legacy canon Ultima dodgyI will also grant you, and calico can probably agree here, there are indeed a lot of holes in the Ultima continuum lol. While UO's theory, gem of immortality shattered creating shards of worlds, is interesting and not bad at all, the game failed to deliver any Ultima feel.
|
|
|
Post by dewderonomy on Jan 11, 2016 2:15:19 GMT
In fairness, what is Ultima canon? It was a hodge-podge of random movies and books, blatant D&D rip-offs and just throwing around time and other dimensions for the sake of adding NPCs and content. It was like by the end of the series, people looked back and said, "See? It all makes sense. There's a storyline there." But until then, it had all the continuation of a Final Fantasy game: some crystals/virtues are important and the hero/heroine has to do stuff with them.
|
|
|
Post by Membrane_on_Vacation on Jan 11, 2016 2:16:32 GMT
That is all accurate and true! Yet, UO still missed any of that
|
|
|
Post by dewderonomy on Jan 11, 2016 2:21:32 GMT
Yet, UO still missed any of that Dunno', I defeated Minax during an EM event, told Shamino his hometown's brew tasted like shit (and he agreed), and got official authorization from Lord British for Trinsic to secede from Britannia. So in short, UO was still a better Ultima than U9.
|
|
|
Post by Membrane_on_Vacation on Jan 11, 2016 2:24:39 GMT
Lol. I can't argue with you too much on that one I suppose
|
|
calico
Strong in the Force
Posts: 299
|
Post by calico on Jan 11, 2016 3:24:09 GMT
In fairness, what is Ultima canon? It was a hodge-podge of random movies and books, blatant D&D rip-offs and just throwing around time and other dimensions for the sake of adding NPCs and content. It was like by the end of the series, people looked back and said, "See? It all makes sense. There's a storyline there." But until then, it had all the continuation of a Final Fantasy game: some crystals/virtues are important and the hero/heroine has to do stuff with them. Ahh, well I can sort of answer where I am coming from. Too me, I loved the fact that each town was based on a virtue and they had continuity from episode 4 on...I new Trinsic and I knew britania...I loved paws....etc....I didn't find that in UO, or at least they didn't feel like Ultima 7. I think you can be right in saying anything before 4 was a hodge podge....but it solidified after that. I guess it is hard to explain the ultima feel...all my years I don't think I can do it now. Whatever it was, UO didn't have it. Yes it used familiar names and had a little canon in it...but I didn't feel ultima. There were no memorable NPC's in UO. None that I could think of at least. I guess my biggest defence of my feelings(not that this is needed or anything) is that I didn't play the hell out of UO....I didn't feel like I wanted to....I even tried going back over the years....but couldn't get into it. I'm a huge Ultima fan, it should have been easy if they are so close.
|
|
|
Post by Membrane_on_Vacation on Jan 11, 2016 3:30:25 GMT
dewd, are there any freeshards out there that take that Ultima feel to heart like calico does and maybe even me for the most part and had a go?
|
|
dodgy
Strong in the Force
Posts: 1,171
|
Post by dodgy on Jan 11, 2016 3:35:32 GMT
I found that yes UO NPCs werent a big deal but it didnt matter coz you had so many people playing.
Towns felt alive back then on the old 56k! Far more alive then in any of the other Ultimas. Each town ended up having its own little flavour and type that hung near it.
The dungeons were much better than any single player ultima.
Plus so many people all interacting. Was great
|
|
|
Post by dewderonomy on Jan 11, 2016 5:06:08 GMT
There were no memorable NPC's in UO. That's the problem. It's Ultima Online. It isn't about the NPCs being memorable; it's about the players. The stories I got myself into, the least of which were with the role-playing community mind you, were far above better than anything the old Ultimas offered. UO was about finding that story, not it being given to you, and it's why so many games fall flat compared to it still. dewd, are there any freeshards out there that take that Ultima feel to heart like calico does and maybe even me for the most part and had a go? Nope. The best out there, last I checked, was UO Forever, but it isn't an Ultima so much as it's an Ultima Online. And even that is questionable.
|
|
|
Post by myrcello on Jan 11, 2016 5:10:05 GMT
Freeshard: The second Age , T2A Is the one i play. It recrested that era.
|
|
dodgy
Strong in the Force
Posts: 1,171
|
Post by dodgy on Jan 11, 2016 5:13:51 GMT
There were no memorable NPC's in UO. That's the problem. It's Ultima Online. It isn't about the NPCs being memorable; it's about the players. The stories I got myself into, the least of which were with the role-playing community mind you, were far above better than anything the old Ultimas offered. UO was about finding that story, not it being given to you, and it's why so many games fall flat compared to it still. dewd, are there any freeshards out there that take that Ultima feel to heart like calico does and maybe even me for the most part and had a go? Nope. The best out there, last I checked, was UO Forever, but it isn't an Ultima so much as it's an Ultima Online. And even that is questionable. AMEN BROTHER!
|
|
|
Post by Membrane_on_Vacation on Jan 11, 2016 5:23:35 GMT
That's the problem. It's Ultima Online. It isn't about the NPCs being memorable; it's about the players. The stories I got myself into, the least of which were with the role-playing community mind you, were far above better than anything the old Ultimas offered. UO was about finding that story, not it being given to you, and it's why so many games fall flat compared to it still. Agreed in full. However, I think the main things are when we're talking about UO in this context are two things in common. UO used something to make its name known. Ultima. SotA used something to make it's name known. UO. When in fact none of them have anything to do with the other, and when I said was becoming UO2 basically I only meant it is moving much closer to an online MultiPlayer game than an epic story game I stupidly bought in KS.
|
|
dodgy
Strong in the Force
Posts: 1,171
|
Post by dodgy on Jan 11, 2016 5:32:25 GMT
That's the problem. It's Ultima Online. It isn't about the NPCs being memorable; it's about the players. The stories I got myself into, the least of which were with the role-playing community mind you, were far above better than anything the old Ultimas offered. UO was about finding that story, not it being given to you, and it's why so many games fall flat compared to it still. Agreed in full. However, I think the main things are when we're talking about UO in this context are two things in common. UO used something to make its name known. Ultima. SotA used something to make it's name known. UO. When in fact none of them have anything to do with the other, and when I said was becoming UO2 basically I only meant it is moving much closer to an online MultiPlayer game than an epic story game I stupidly bought in KS. Do you really think Ultima stands up to time or do you think its rose tinted glasses? I mean the story is all over the place with probably 7/8/9 having any real flow.
|
|
|
Post by dewderonomy on Jan 11, 2016 5:47:09 GMT
However, I think the main things are when we're talking about UO in this context are two things in common. UO used something to make its name known. Ultima. Agreed, but I think that's the issue not just with SotA but sandboxes in general. The intention behind UO was probably to give people the Ultima world and let them experience it "between Avatars". "Who protects the land when the Avatar is gone?" "Do people remember his/her sacrifices?" "Are the Virtues maintained?" Nevermind that UO was supposed to take place between U1 and U2, hundreds of Britannian years before the Virtues were even established; they were in the game and so they were acknowledged. I imagine this might be a similar issue for some people with sandboxes as a whole, the expectation that the game itself is the source of enjoyment, not the interactions. I enjoy sandbox RPGs for what they allow me to do, but when you throw players in there, it's about that freedom to interact with the freedoms of others. In short, enforcing my will on another player's using game mechanics. UO was all about that, despite its flawed gameplay. So whether or not the intention was there, it was always supposed to be up to us, the players, to bring the engagement. If you wanted an Ultima, a true Ultima, then let me ask: did you talk about the Virtues to other players? Did you try to expound upon them with your neighbor or denounce them to those who would listen? Did you consider a perverse form in the vein of Blackthorn's definitions or rather create your own Fellowship to lead your flock astray? Did you seek to emulate the Virtues by becoming a Ranger, taming wild beasts and going on solitary adventures of self-discovery, or sacrifice your time and money as a Tinker in Minoc, helping orphans and the poor (newbies) on their feet? (By the way, that's how I got helped when I first started). My point is Ultima was always there. But sandboxes require players to actually give a shit; they aren't there for you to follow bread crumbs to the next exclamation point. You log in and do what you want to do, be what you want to be, and create the environment you want to log in tomorrow and play in. Personally, if someone didn't do some version of the things above, I'd seriously wonder what it was they would expect from an online Ultima, being that without the above, you don't really have an Ultima. I mean the story is all over the place with probably 7/8/9 having any real flow. U6 was really good (and there's an online version of it, in fact - rather fun to play). U7's storyline was good, but the mechanics sucked bad. I would highly question the merit of someone's opinion on developing a video game if they thought the mechanics behind Ultima 7 were... oh shit.
|
|
|
Post by Membrane_on_Vacation on Jan 11, 2016 5:49:50 GMT
dodgy Personally for me it stands up. U4-U7s. If Pagan was properly finished I think it too would have had an interesting story, despite the poor gameplay. But this is for story "being given to you" which dewd points out well is still going to be hard to compete against creating or finding one though RP for some. There are many kinds of gamers because there are many kinds of people, everyone will have a different experience for the most part and in the end I suppose it comes down to a personal preference.
|
|
|
Post by dewderonomy on Jan 11, 2016 5:54:55 GMT
There are many kinds of gamers because there are many kinds of people, everyone will have a different experience for the most part and in the end I suppose it comes down to a personal preference. Are you implying that correct expectations should be set? Hogwash.
|
|
dodgy
Strong in the Force
Posts: 1,171
|
Post by dodgy on Jan 11, 2016 6:42:18 GMT
dodgy Personally for me it stands up. U4-U7s. If Pagan was properly finished I think it too would have had an interesting story, despite the poor gameplay. But this is for story "being given to you" which dewd points out well is still going to be hard to compete against creating or finding one though RP for some. There are many kinds of gamers because there are many kinds of people, everyone will have a different experience for the most part and in the end I suppose it comes down to a personal preference. OH look im being a bit of devils advocate I would never of played UO if I wasnt totally besotted with the Ultima series. Dewd explains it pretty well. Look I quit around AOS in the hope of Shadowbane bringing back that UO feel lol. In the time I played the game was so cosmopolitan, I didnt even play it how I would play an MMO today. I just explored and interacted. It took me a few months before I even GMed anything coz I was lost in the interaction and the fact I was playing with real people! Missions into Shame, Deceit etc. Fighting PKers at Crossroads/ Brit moongate etc. Bumbling my way through my first multiplayer experience. Huge battles with TDK and -E-. My first PK, my change from innocent player to malicious pk to annoying thief. Was fantastic and it would of sucked completely without those people I met, fought etc. Hell when I eventually got my thief I used to harrass this PKer Oak. He was huge on Oceania. Anyway long story short i ended up working with him in real life and he remembered me solely coz of how annoying I was stealing his reagents and bandages mid PK. I mean in nearly every game (except maybe EVE) I barely remember my opponents unless they really stand out and normally thats the duration of the battle purely to attempt to shut down the heals
|
|
|
Post by dewderonomy on Jan 11, 2016 9:08:21 GMT
Dewd explains it pretty well. Look I quit around AOS in the hope of Shadowbane bringing back that UO feel lol. In the time I played the game was so cosmopolitan, I didnt even play it how I would play an MMO today. I just explored and interacted. It took me a few months before I even GMed anything coz I was lost in the interaction and the fact I was playing with real people! This is why people want sandboxes, but also why sandboxes fail. The nostalgia that UO brings to people clouds the reality that MMOs aren't new anymore. Hell, public-wide internet isn't new, either; UO not only came out as one of the first MMOs, but during a time that online multi-player was still relatively new. We can't just jump into games and explore and enjoy ourselves anymore. The main reason revolves around games being shitty, particularly in the sandbox genre. The other equally important reason is the player mindset; for too long the mad sprint to the "end game" has clouded the original mission of these games, which was "just enjoy the fucking experience." Nothing more than that. It made sense back then, too, 'cause we all knew there was no way to win or beat the game. It was about logging in and seeing what adventures you could get into. Now it's rush to the end game and be at the forefront of every expansion that comes out next. It's no surprise, then, that MMOs peak within 3 months and then rapidly die or fall into a vegetative state. If we're to have a decent sandbox experience ever again, it will take considerable effort to socially engineer the mechanics to encourage that mentality and playstyle rather than leave it up to the players and hope they just enjoy themselves for the sake of it. Crazy how devs would have to deprogram us from that shit.
|
|
|
Post by Membrane_on_Vacation on Jan 11, 2016 9:43:35 GMT
Cant fault any of that dewd. How do you feel about the potential experiences you can have in MineCraft? Especially since MineCraft servers can be as vanilla or as flavoured they want based on whom is hosting the server? This is one of the reasons which I backed Shards Online, modding and hopefully open sandbox type.
|
|