Trending Games | Warhammer 40K: Eternal Crusade | Sword Coast Legends | Crowfall | Camelot Unchained

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,950,829 Users Online:0
Games:778  Posts:6,376,037
Portalarium Inc | Official Site
MMORPG | Genre:Fantasy | Status:Development  (est.rel N/A)  | Pub:Portalarium Inc
PVP:Yes | Distribution:Download,Retail | Retail Price:n/a | Monthly Fee:n/a
System Req: PC Mac Linux | Out of date info? Let us know!

Shroud of the Avatar Forum » General Discussion » So Richard Garriott ...

4 Pages « 1 2 3 4 Search
75 posts found
  Mondo80

Novice Member

Joined: 11/11/04
Posts: 180

5/22/14 11:32:48 AM#61
He took 20 million of his own money to go into space instead of investing it into "his" game.  Tabula Risa had a lot of potential, NCsoft is run by morons, they killed CoH for fucks sake.  PWE is a better company than NCsoft.

  Maribu

Apprentice Member

Joined: 5/14/14
Posts: 14

5/28/14 2:13:56 AM#62
Originally posted by Aragon100
Originally posted by redgang1
Originally posted by Aragon100
Originally posted by tawess
Originally posted by Aragon100

I pledged for your game on your promise and i feel you tricked me. Dont worry though i wont go for a reclaim of my pledge, so you can keep my money but i want you to remember the way you managed to get it.

 

 

I think you over-estimate A: how often he reads these forums B: how much he actually cares about your opinion seeing as you are still donating to the game.

 

But i guess you feel better now as you got that off your chest.

Yeah he tricked me to pledge for something that was never there. I doubt he will ever repond to this cause he know i am right and that wont help him in his mission making SotA successful.

 

Don't feel bad, almost all KS are scams that allow devs to work with zero accountability. I doubt the backers of Hex had any idea it was going to copy every aspect of Magic the Gathering before they donated. Same with Brad McQuaid taking 1/3 of the money for "medical bills."

Until a high accountability centered Kickstarter program is created it's a complete waste of time and money.

Aye. Kickstarter can easily create expectations of something that in the end isnt delivered. Developers being vague and present the game as Richard Garriott did with words like "spiritual successor to UO" opens up for expectations that might not have been there in the beginning.

Developers should have to inform in detail what the game features are so people dont pledge for games that turn out to be something completely different.

Oh good god. You keep repeating that Richard Garriot said "spiritual successor to UO."   You've been told this many times but you keep ignoring it.   He did not say "spiritual successor to UO." He did not say "spiritual successor to pre-trammel UO."   He said "spiritual successor to the Ultima franchise."  There's a world of difference ffs. He said he's making an rpg like the ultima series with some mmo elements like UO so it can be played online with others.   How long are you going to continue ranting and throwing a tantrum over something that is your own fault for not paying attention.  Get over it man.  You saw what you wanted to see and now having hard time accepting that.

  Aragon100

Elite Member

Joined: 2/06/08
Posts: 2276

 
OP  5/28/14 2:56:06 AM#63
Originally posted by Maribu
Originally posted by Aragon100
Originally posted by redgang1
Originally posted by Aragon100
Originally posted by tawess
Originally posted by Aragon100

I pledged for your game on your promise and i feel you tricked me. Dont worry though i wont go for a reclaim of my pledge, so you can keep my money but i want you to remember the way you managed to get it.

 

 

I think you over-estimate A: how often he reads these forums B: how much he actually cares about your opinion seeing as you are still donating to the game.

 

But i guess you feel better now as you got that off your chest.

Yeah he tricked me to pledge for something that was never there. I doubt he will ever repond to this cause he know i am right and that wont help him in his mission making SotA successful.

 

Don't feel bad, almost all KS are scams that allow devs to work with zero accountability. I doubt the backers of Hex had any idea it was going to copy every aspect of Magic the Gathering before they donated. Same with Brad McQuaid taking 1/3 of the money for "medical bills."

Until a high accountability centered Kickstarter program is created it's a complete waste of time and money.

Aye. Kickstarter can easily create expectations of something that in the end isnt delivered. Developers being vague and present the game as Richard Garriott did with words like "spiritual successor to UO" opens up for expectations that might not have been there in the beginning.

Developers should have to inform in detail what the game features are so people dont pledge for games that turn out to be something completely different.

Oh good god. You keep repeating that Richard Garriot said "spiritual successor to UO."   You've been told this many times but you keep ignoring it.   He did not say "spiritual successor to UO." He did not say "spiritual successor to pre-trammel UO."   He said "spiritual successor to the Ultima franchise."  There's a world of difference ffs. He said he's making an rpg like the ultima series with some mmo elements like UO so it can be played online with others.   How long are you going to continue ranting and throwing a tantrum over something that is your own fault for not paying attention.  Get over it man.  You saw what you wanted to see and now having hard time accepting that.

And your just as wrong as all others that claimed Richard Garriott never said " Shroud of the Avatar will be a spiritual successor to UO". 

http://i.imgur.com/e5BgsFm.png

Richard did compare SotA with UO and not just the Ultima games as you wrongly claim.

You need to read up abit better on the game since you seem to have missed some info.

And try to understand - just cause you havent read it dont mean it isnt true. 

  Aragon100

Elite Member

Joined: 2/06/08
Posts: 2276

 
OP  6/04/14 3:31:17 AM#64
Originally posted by Aragon100
Originally posted by stevebombsquad
Originally posted by Aragon100
Originally posted by Nanfoodle
The problem is you hand over money with no agreement. At best its been, "We gona try and get this done with the money" There is no way to hold any one accountable. If you invest in a product this way, it can only be done with no expectations. Who is happy they helped fund Facebooks new 3D glasses Oculus? Did anyone get their cut? That was going to be a cheap option for gamers to get 3D. lol

SotA developers claimed this and that  nad held very little. They even claimed they listen to their community which they dont. They listen to a few vocal PvE players and all the PvP players suggestiont went in and out of their ears.

A few vocal PvE players....?????  It is a fact that the majority of players prefer PvE to PvP. This is why PvP is normally a secondary system in a MMO. Most of the people I know that played Ultima Online were more interested in the roleplaying, sandbox, and open world elements. Don't try to portray that you represent the majority because you don't. 

You might be right but dont underestimate the numbers of old UO PvP players that pledged for SotA being the next UO PvP game. Especially since Richard Garriott claimed this SotA game should be a spiritual successor to UO.

Polls over at SotA forums tell us that a vast najority want a more hardcore game then the one developers choosed to make.

They didnt listen to their PvP community and instead went for pleasing the PvP uninterested PvE players every word. Just amazing.

Following the progression of this game and now seeing more of the endresult have made me wonder who got the ears of the SotA developer team? Is it so that these developers selectively listen to a few and very vocal SotA forum carebears (yes the same persons can be found in just about every PvP thread over at SotA forums even though they have little interest in PvP) and never actually realized (or choosed not to realize) the numbers of old UO PvP players pledging for their game? 

Pledging on the Richard Garriott words that this game will be a " spiritual successor to Ultima Online".

Just read this thread - 

https://shroudoftheavatar.com/forum/index.php?threads/my-personal-story-and-opinion-idea-on-pvp-systems.11431/ 

and i see some of the same vocal carebears explaining their fears with risk vs reward PvP and consequences in PvP even though the PvP in SotA will only be consensual.

Just amazing, and what is even more amazing is that SotA developers have with their so called PvP compromize -

https://shroudoftheavatar.com/forum/index.php?threads/pvp-death-current-thinking-megapost.8247/

decided to give in to these vocal not PvP interested carebears instead of listening to the ones that actually have an interest in PvP.

 

What is the really big mystery with not allowing a risk vs reward PvP gamestyle that the majority of the PvP players want is that anyone not wanting to take part in this risk vs reward PvP gamestyle can decide not to take part. 

All can still play online with friends and take part in all aspects of the game but the risk vs reward PvP since it is a feature you have to manually accept ingame.

What is bugging me is that Richard Garriott goes out telling potential pledgers that SotA will be a spiritual successor to UO and with those words he brought in alot of old UO PvP players money. 

Then during the progress of this game we got information that we the SotA developers want suggestions about the game and that we do listen to our community.

So trusting in those words alot of PvP interested players gave feedback to what they want to see come true in the SotA PvP game. Loads of suggestions on how PvP should be made in SotA were brought forward and just about all that had interest in PvP wanted a risk vs reward PvP enviroment. The feature full loot which had an overwhelming majority over at SotA forums were in the so called PvP compromize no gear loot whatsoever as long as the one killed had money in the bank. Loot will only be money. This is very far from what the majority of the PvP players wanted ingame.

 

Why did SotA developers choose to go against the majority of the PvP interested players and instead give in to some vocal carebears with little interest in PvP?

It's a mystery and i would like to hear Richard Garriott's explain this.

Same time he can answer my original questions i made in this thread.

 

 

 

 

  Caldrin

Advanced Member

Joined: 10/02/04
Posts: 4442

6/04/14 3:43:31 AM#65
"

Meaningful PVP that also minimizes griefing:

An incentive-driven system will draw players into the challenge and intrigue of the PVP experience, whether they become the hunter or the hunted!"

***

Taken from the kickstarter page.. I was never expecting a new Ultima online as this is not even a true mmo.. i was expecting more of a single player game like the old ultima games but with some multiplayer options and i think that is what we are going to get.

 

 

My 3D models
http://dragon3d.webs.com/

  Aragon100

Elite Member

Joined: 2/06/08
Posts: 2276

 
OP  6/04/14 6:15:56 AM#66
Originally posted by Caldrin
"

Meaningful PVP that also minimizes griefing:

An incentive-driven system will draw players into the challenge and intrigue of the PVP experience, whether they become the hunter or the hunted!"

***

Taken from the kickstarter page.. I was never expecting a new Ultima online as this is not even a true mmo.. i was expecting more of a single player game like the old ultima games but with some multiplayer options and i think that is what we are going to get.

 

 

What is it you dont understand?

Meaningfull PVP that also minimizes griefing: yes since PvP will be consensual it wont be griefing, it will be PvP, and the vast majority of the PvP players wanted a risk vs reward  PvP game and not the WoW game it have become. They wanted skillbased PvP (not a card game) and full loot. Both of these features were denied by developers. They instead listened to the PvP uninterested carebears.

Only listening selectively to certain members of your playerbase is why this game lost many of the old UO PvP players. Pleasing the minority is never a good choice if you want a successful game.

Richard Garriott claimed this game would be the spiritual successor of Ultima Online, not only the Ultima single player series. 

It was a smart but betrayful business move since he tricked alot of old UO PvP veterans to pledge for the game with those exact words.

  Maribu

Apprentice Member

Joined: 5/14/14
Posts: 14

6/04/14 11:12:26 PM#67

Aragon100.   Again, what part of UO?  Did he say?   Did he say first 2 years of UO?  Did he say full loot open pvp, or did you just assume that?  Did he say Felucca?  There's a whole lot more to UO than pvp, even if he ever did say specifically UO. 

 

And the majority of the pvpers on the forums are happy with the pvp system they're currently planning.  There's only a small handful of agitators  that keep spamming the forum, nagging, badgering, and bedeviling the dev team for what you're complaining about like kids nagging their parents thinking they can harrass them into giving in. 

 

Here is what was promised from day 1.....  https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/portalarium/shroud-of-the-avatar-forsaken-virtues-0   .....Never has it been promised for open full loot pvp at any time since then.  You really should just accept that you made assumptions, heard what you wanted to hear, and saw what you wanted to see.  That's on you for not paying attention, not on Richard Garriott.

  prowesss

Novice Member

Joined: 4/12/14
Posts: 72

6/04/14 11:36:42 PM#68
Shards online is the true spiritual successor to both UO and NwN.


I chose the Xfinity speed test because it does not reveal my ISP.

  Legere

Advanced Member

Joined: 11/20/11
Posts: 117

6/04/14 11:59:26 PM#69

UO PVP is a matter of going outside the town, and getting ganked by 10 PK's, then losing all your gear. and having PK's camp dungeon spots as ghosts, so when you go there, they know you are there, gate open, Ganked, looted. start over again.

not fun man, not fun at all.

not for SOTA pls.

 

  Ket_Viliano

Apprentice Member

Joined: 5/13/14
Posts: 272

6/05/14 12:25:37 AM#70
Originally posted by gothokaos
Originally posted by Aragon100

This vision dont exist anymore. It went 100% carebear.

After a year of whining the PvE players got their completely safe game world. There are no risk vs reward or consequences in SotA. The combat system will be a random, luck based cardgame.

So it is the same story we seen the last +10 years, PvE players destroy it for the PvP players. They got all their wishes and everything the PvP crowd over at SotA forum wanted was denied by Richard Garriott and his developer friends.

So yes i will definetly pass on this game. 

 

 

LOL! He is whining about "the carebears" now! We ruined EVERYTHING!!

Maybe Richard will give you a graveyard outside of town so you can guard kill players! How about UOAssist? How about the other tools that let you see hidden players? 2 vs 15 LOL!! Now that is unbalanced unless your talking about killing new players! Sounds like Kung Fu theater!

Ultima Online released in 1997!! I played and PVP'ed back then too! You don't see me whining about "The good ole days of ganking." They changed the game for a reason. The investors want popular games with subs, not people leaving because they keep getting griefed everytime they leave the city.

You just want to be able to gank people again! Admit it!

LoL, love this.

 

Sheep is the new wolf!

  Aragon100

Elite Member

Joined: 2/06/08
Posts: 2276

 
OP  6/05/14 8:28:33 AM#71
Originally posted by Maribu

Aragon100.   Again, what part of UO?  Did he say?   Did he say first 2 years of UO?  Did he say full loot open pvp, or did you just assume that?  Did he say Felucca?  There's a whole lot more to UO than pvp, even if he ever did say specifically UO. 

 

And the majority of the pvpers on the forums are happy with the pvp system they're currently planning.  There's only a small handful of agitators  that keep spamming the forum, nagging, badgering, and bedeviling the dev team for what you're complaining about like kids nagging their parents thinking they can harrass them into giving in. 

 

Here is what was promised from day 1.....  https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/portalarium/shroud-of-the-avatar-forsaken-virtues-0   .....Never has it been promised for open full loot pvp at any time since then.  You really should just accept that you made assumptions, heard what you wanted to hear, and saw what you wanted to see.  That's on you for not paying attention, not on Richard Garriott.

What do you know about Richard Garriott's UO?

Did you even know that he sold the game to EA and ended his part of UO early 2000. 

quote - Garriott sold Origin to Electronic Arts in September 1992. In 1997, he coined the term massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG), giving a new identity to the nascent genre previously known as graphical MUDs.[16] In 1999 and 2000, EA canceled all of Origin's new development projects, including Privateer Online, and Harry Potter Online.[17][18] In the midst of these events, Garriott resigned from the company and returned to the industry by forming Destination Games in April 2000 with his brother and Starr Long(the producer of Ultima Online). Once Garriott's non-compete agreement with EA expired a year later, - endquote

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Garriott

So when he call it a spiritual successor to Ultima Online he of course mean the part of Ultima Online he himself took part in. Why should he talk about a game he had no part in?

When he claim this and on top of that being vague in kickstarter about PvP and say it will be settled later on then he build expectations for a PvP game close to old Ultima Online, nothing else. He tricked old UO PvP veterans to sponsor his WoW PvP game. He have been fraudish. Built expectations that never were there.

That is on him, not me. And i am far from the only one feeling this way. Many hardcore PvP players never post over at SotA forums anymore, have you asked yourself the question why is it so?

Reason is they have left the game in disapointment of the so called PvP compromize developers presented and that went 100% into the carebears direction. Just about everything the PvP players wished for in many, many months and in hundreds of threads over at SotA forums was rejected by developers. And a vast majority of the PvP players wanted full loot and a risk vs reward PvP game. Been many polls on just that.

Why should developers want to fulfill the carebears PvP expectations, players that isnt interesd in PvP? Just insane. 

They managed to scare away a good part of their playerbase by going just about 100% in a direction the PvP players didnt want. It's like we the old PvP players isnt wanted over at SotA. Old UO PvP players are also being humiliated and trashtalked just about daily over at SotA forums with the good memory of their biased moderators. They say it is a bannable offense to call a carebear a carebear but calling a PvP player a person with psycological problems is just fine. Worst forums ever.

People that want a PvP game that is at least as hardcore as WoW (yes SotA is way less hardcore) should stay far away from this game and not hand their hard earned money to a company that do their best to trick players funding them on false expectations as Richard Garriott did.

SotA is not a spiritual successor to Ultima Online when it comes to PvP, it actually have nothing that is even remotely close to the PvP we saw in Richard Garriott's UO.

 

 

  Aragon100

Elite Member

Joined: 2/06/08
Posts: 2276

 
OP  6/05/14 8:38:44 AM#72
Originally posted by Legere

UO PVP is a matter of going outside the town, and getting ganked by 10 PK's, then losing all your gear. and having PK's camp dungeon spots as ghosts, so when you go there, they know you are there, gate open, Ganked, looted. start over again.

not fun man, not fun at all.

not for SOTA pls.

 

If you read the thread then you would know i am just fine with consensual PvP.

With consensual PvP there is no griefing since you consented to PvP.

I suggest you read up on the thread and we would not have to have this meaningless discussion based on something i never claimed.

 

  Aragon100

Elite Member

Joined: 2/06/08
Posts: 2276

 
OP  6/05/14 8:41:56 AM#73
Originally posted by Ket_Viliano
Originally posted by gothokaos
Originally posted by Aragon100

This vision dont exist anymore. It went 100% carebear.

After a year of whining the PvE players got their completely safe game world. There are no risk vs reward or consequences in SotA. The combat system will be a random, luck based cardgame.

So it is the same story we seen the last +10 years, PvE players destroy it for the PvP players. They got all their wishes and everything the PvP crowd over at SotA forum wanted was denied by Richard Garriott and his developer friends.

So yes i will definetly pass on this game. 

 

 

LOL! He is whining about "the carebears" now! We ruined EVERYTHING!!

Maybe Richard will give you a graveyard outside of town so you can guard kill players! How about UOAssist? How about the other tools that let you see hidden players? 2 vs 15 LOL!! Now that is unbalanced unless your talking about killing new players! Sounds like Kung Fu theater!

Ultima Online released in 1997!! I played and PVP'ed back then too! You don't see me whining about "The good ole days of ganking." They changed the game for a reason. The investors want popular games with subs, not people leaving because they keep getting griefed everytime they leave the city.

You just want to be able to gank people again! Admit it!

LoL, love this.

 

Sheep is the new wolf!

You managed to miss my reply to Gothokaos, i wonder why? And didnt you know i was just fine with consensual PvP, it is said in this thread. With consensual PvP there might be ganks but it wont be griefing since you consented to take part. I suggest you read up.

Originally posted by Aragon100
Originally posted by gothokaos
Originally posted by Aragon100

This vision dont exist anymore. It went 100% carebear.

After a year of whining the PvE players got their completely safe game world. There are no risk vs reward or consequences in SotA. The combat system will be a random, luck based cardgame.

So it is the same story we seen the last +10 years, PvE players destroy it for the PvP players. They got all their wishes and everything the PvP crowd over at SotA forum wanted was denied by Richard Garriott and his developer friends.

So yes i will definetly pass on this game. 

 

 

LOL! He is whining about "the carebears" now! We ruined EVERYTHING!!

Maybe Richard will give you a graveyard outside of town so you can guard kill players! How about UOAssist? How about the other tools that let you see hidden players? 2 vs 15 LOL!! Now that is unbalanced unless your talking about killing new players! Sounds like Kung Fu theater!

Ultima Online released in 1997!! I played and PVP'ed back then too! You don't see me whining about "The good ole days of ganking." They changed the game for a reason. The investors want popular games with subs, not people leaving because they keep getting griefed everytime they leave the city.

You just want to be able to gank people again! Admit it!

I have no idea where you got the ganking from. Me myself play in one of the most skilled PvP guilds ever and we usually fight against equally skilled players outnumbered. The ganking can stand for you.

2vs15 was not the standard day but our best two PvP players in UO during UO renaissance time could manage those odds sometimes. And pre-trammel was another game then post-trammel in felucca. Post-trammel was way more balanced and you fought players that wanted the fight. Praying on newbies is not our style.

What SotA developers did was only listening to one part of their community, the PvE players. All suggestions made by the PvP crowd was rejected. That is not listening to your community. That is selective listening.

SotA would have been alot more successful and have a way bigger community if it was the coming UO2. Carebear games are easy to find but a UO2 game would have stood out as something different then the mainstream crap we see today.

 

  NeoCroX997

Apprentice Member

Joined: 4/26/12
Posts: 28

6/17/14 4:42:35 PM#74
Originally posted by Aragon100
Originally posted by superconducting

Why didn't you post in the forum Q&A when it was going on? At least you might have gotten a response then.

http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/408742

I am not online on this site 24/7. Are you?

The Alpha/Beta will be updated each month in 12 parts and then final release. That means it will be fully released 2015. Why do you rush it so much, give it some time and it will hopefully get better every month.

PS: Not here 24/7 are you? xD. 

Videos for you to watch> http://www.mmorpg.com/showFeature.cfm/feature/8607/page/2 The one at the top.

Enjoy!

 

 

 

  zach_b

Novice Member

Joined: 6/17/14
Posts: 28

6/17/14 5:26:50 PM#75

While the OP is completely disillusioned and inconsistent with his accounts of UO PvP (Pre-UOR is the only actual PvP phase of UO) it does serve to highlight a rather significant point I think could be made for SotA. That being there is very little to differentiate SotA from the pack at this point. Not that PvP was THE thing to have it stand out, the risk vs reward system is something that would differentiate it.

Allow me to pontificate for a moment. If we break the current SotA down into generalities we can safely say that it offers very little compared to current MMORPG's. Housing exists in a few, carebear PvP exists everywhere, permaloot exists everywhere, crafting exists everywhere, etc.  What doesn't exist is a game that properly balances risk and reward to return the sense of achievement/accomplishment to games. This is games in general, not necessarily MMORPG's. If you are a student of your hobbies at all, you will have probably read The Paradox of Choice by Barry Schwartz. In which he details the growing trend of, to put it simply, "meh".

This trend has pushed so deep into gaming that it's now nearly impossible for people to have truly rewarding feelings from gaming. Demons Soul series being one of the few exceptions. We have an expectation to win and accomplish. Our accomplishments are then easily repeatable by everyone and we end up with a feeling of "meh". Product of the new school of gaming where you feel entitled to an easymode? Go play NES Mega Man or Mike Tyson's PunchOut and get back to me. Finish either of those and you'll feel like a boss. Finish BattleToads and you'll feel like an immortal walking around amongst peasants.

I think what the OP could have been expressing, is the homogenization and carebearification of SotA to the point one of the defining characteristics of the Ultima universe and UO universe: inherent risk and reward, are being completely gouged in favor of the current design principle of lowest common denominator.

You might say: "But Zach! I'm a casual and I play games to relax and have fun! I don't care about goals or accomplishments!" False. Humans are goal oriented to the point we set goals subconsciously continuously throughout our day. "But Zach! I'm different! I'm so happy and fluffy that I have zero competitive desire!" Again, patently false in the general. There are certain chemical imbalances that can cause a person to be like this, you should seek medical assistance. "Zaaaaaaach! No rly dough. I just like to log in and roll around with kittens!" Don't get me wrong, I'll snuggle the fuck out of some kittens, but as a human I have a desire to accomplish and succeed. I derive pleasure from accomplishments. I know that the greatest senses of accomplishment come through some of the greatest hardships. We are all the same, you don't know yourself better than science knows you. "Zach! You are not listening! I. AM. DIFFERENT!!! I RIKEY PRAY GRAMES NO GOALS NO ACCOMPLISHMENTS MY PLEASURE IS FROM JUST EXISTING IN THE GAME!" You're lying to yourself and to me. Stop it.

Look, I'm not bashing the new style of games. I don't think "casual" gaming is such a bad thing in the general. I'm 30, I have familial responsibilities, and each new semester I have to deal with ~ 180 surrogate children and their helicopter parents. I don't have time to just sit on my butt for 12 hours and game my face off. I like that I can still do stuff even with a 4-12 hour total play time per week, with the occasional LAN party at the University amongst us younger profs. However, this continuing removal of risk is not good for gaming. If you don't finish a game and feel like you've accomplished something, then that game failed and by my standards and many others, games are often failing as of late.

Feel free to TL;DR this. It was longwinded and I was sidetracked more than once.

4 Pages « 1 2 3 4 Search