Trending Games | ArcheAge | Elder Scrolls Online | WildStar | Age of Wushu

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,796,793 Users Online:0
Games:723  Posts:6,195,565
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System Req: PC Mac Linux | Out of date info?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
  Aragon100

Elite Member

Joined: 2/06/08
Posts: 2201

 
OP  3/30/14 6:19:33 PM#21
Originally posted by Tinea

I always thought SotA was a spiritual successor to the Ultima series, not specifically UO.  I never got a strong feeling about PvP from the website or any videos I've seen.  I viewed the link that was posted by the OP and am surprised that Garriott said it was a spritiual successor to UO... I hadn't viewed the project in that light.

If you backed the project based on a single post or a quote, then I'm I'd say that you took a big risk.

Well many did see it as a spiritual successor to UO and a spirital successor to something close to that old UO PvP. Many old UO PvP veterans pledged on those words from Richard Garriott and as it seem today SotA will be nowhere close to that old UO game when it comes to PvP.

PvP was never explained in detail during kickstarter campaign. If i knew back then what i know today Richard would never have gotten my money.

 

  tawess

Elite Member

Joined: 3/24/05
Posts: 1930

3/30/14 6:36:25 PM#22
Originally posted by Aragon100
Originally posted by tawess

That being said... UO PvP IIRC was mostly about clicking attack and hoping for the best. Agree about the risk vs reward thing (as in the main goal was always to get as much reward for as little risk as one could.. like ganking weak mages just out of combat... You know you did it... 

I guess you were very unexperienced and never any good at UO PvP since you believe UO PvP was about clicking attack and hope for the best.

UO PvP as a mage was fast paced and you needed superb timing in everything you did, timing and tactics. Old UO veterans know this since they used it in every encounter. UO teamfight took loads of player skills, tactics and teamplay - to become successful as a team you needed a good caller of spells, good communication and very good timing of spells and of course the ones being attacked needed just as good if nor better healing capacity, and everything had to be done in milliseconds. This described is just a small part of what was needed in UO to become successful. 

There havent been a MMO game before or after old pre Age of Shadows UO that took as much player skills to become successful. My GM:s won a 2 vs 15 against another experienced PvP guild, they managed this cause they were very experienced and had superior player skills. Old UO had very little with luck to do.

So your attack and hope for the best have nothing with reality to do. Did you even play the game or just here to troll?

I believe Richard will read this, actually i am quite sure he does. Will he respond? I doubt it.

 

Seeing how most of my time in the game was spent on a dial-up connection... Yeah it was pretty much attack and hope for the best. I was a rather lighthearted dig at the fact that back then EVERYTHING online was s slave to evil little brother of R2-D2... No need to take it so bloody seriously. As for your memory of how PvP was... I think you have a pair of very tinted glasses on or some very selective memory.

Tomas Soapbox

This have been a good conversation

  Tbau

Advanced Member

Joined: 3/07/14
Posts: 407

3/30/14 6:37:24 PM#23
Originally posted by Aragon100

spiritual successor,[1][2] sometimes called a spiritual sequel, is a successor to a work of fiction which does not build upon the storyline established by a previous work as do most traditional prequels or sequels, yet features many of the same elements, themes, and styles as its source material, thereby resulting in its nevertheless being related or similar "in spirit" to its predecessor.

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

There is nothing similar "in spirit" when you compare old UO PvP with SotA PvP. SotA is not a spiritual successor to that old Ultima Online game when it comes to PvP. UO was a hardcore PvP game with risk vs reward and consequences. 

PvP was a small part of UO and thus not having a single element of it does not remove it from being its spiritual successor since it contains virtually everything else.

in fact you are one of the few claiming it is not, showing yet again how in the minority your train of thought is.

  lizardbones

Elite Member

Joined: 6/11/08
Posts: 10430

I've become dependent upon spell check. My apologies for stupid grammatical errors.

3/30/14 7:44:13 PM#24

He said what he said about SotA to everyone, not just the "UO PvP veterans".  There were many more "UO Player veterans" than "UO PvP veterans".  What would you think that what he said was directed at a specific group?  More importantly, why would you think the comment was directed specifically at the group you put yourself in and not the much larger group of players that played on Trammel?

 

It seems to me that the major problem here isn't what he said, it's what you wanted what he said to mean.

 

For every large, complex problem, there is a simple, clear solution that also happens to be absolutely wrong.

  Aragon100

Elite Member

Joined: 2/06/08
Posts: 2201

 
OP  3/31/14 1:16:08 AM#25
Originally posted by Tbau
Originally posted by Aragon100

spiritual successor,[1][2] sometimes called a spiritual sequel, is a successor to a work of fiction which does not build upon the storyline established by a previous work as do most traditional prequels or sequels, yet features many of the same elements, themes, and styles as its source material, thereby resulting in its nevertheless being related or similar "in spirit" to its predecessor.

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

There is nothing similar "in spirit" when you compare old UO PvP with SotA PvP. SotA is not a spiritual successor to that old Ultima Online game when it comes to PvP. UO was a hardcore PvP game with risk vs reward and consequences. 

PvP was a small part of UO and thus not having a single element of it does not remove it from being its spiritual successor since it contains virtually everything else.

in fact you are one of the few claiming it is not, showing yet again how in the minority your train of thought is.

PvP was a major feature in UO 1997-february 2003. I could go as far as claim it was the main feature that was practiced the most during that time.

  Aragon100

Elite Member

Joined: 2/06/08
Posts: 2201

 
OP  3/31/14 1:20:52 AM#26
Originally posted by lizardbones

He said what he said about SotA to everyone, not just the "UO PvP veterans".  There were many more "UO Player veterans" than "UO PvP veterans".  What would you think that what he said was directed at a specific group?  More importantly, why would you think the comment was directed specifically at the group you put yourself in and not the much larger group of players that played on Trammel?

 

It seems to me that the major problem here isn't what he said, it's what you wanted what he said to mean.

 

I expected my group of UO veterans to be included in his statement. Why shouldnt i?

To say it is a spiritual successor to UO dont exclude UO PvP. To leave out just about all details on PvP during kickstarter made many old UO PvP veterans pledge in hope for this game would be the next UO.

So yes, i pledged on Richards words and a hope for this being the next UO with a PvP system close to that old game. And i am far from the only UO PvP veteran that did just that. 

Saying it will be a spiritual successor to UO was what triggered my interest. Little to no information about PvP during kickstarter didnt make it easier. So many old UO PvP veterans have been searching for the next UO and hearing Richard the creator of UO claiming this will be the spiritual successor to UO triggered many of us to pledge. I bet no old UO PvP player that pledged on the words spiritual successor to UO saw a PvP and combat system lamer then WoW coming.

It was a smart move to claim it was a spiritual successor of UO and leave out just about all details on the PvP system. Must have brought him alot of pledgers from the old UO PvP group that were longing for the next UO.

 

  Karteli

Apprentice Member

Joined: 7/09/12
Posts: 2704

3/31/14 1:23:31 AM#27

Richard Garriott could have been so much more if he never sold Origin Systems to EA :(

 

On Topic: I would like if this game came out with a flat price with regards to housing, instead of having to make a 3-month car payment in hopes that this game eventually sees light, just to have a freaking house upon launch.  Bleech!

Want a nice understanding of life? Try Spirit Science: "The Human History"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8NNHmV3QPw&feature=plcp
Recognize the voice? Yep sounds like Penny Arcade's Extra Credits.

  lizardbones

Elite Member

Joined: 6/11/08
Posts: 10430

I've become dependent upon spell check. My apologies for stupid grammatical errors.

3/31/14 5:27:45 AM#28
Originally posted by Aragon100
Originally posted by lizardbones

He said what he said about SotA to everyone, not just the "UO PvP veterans".  There were many more "UO Player veterans" than "UO PvP veterans".  What would you think that what he said was directed at a specific group?  More importantly, why would you think the comment was directed specifically at the group you put yourself in and not the much larger group of players that played on Trammel?

 

It seems to me that the major problem here isn't what he said, it's what you wanted what he said to mean.

 

I expected my group of UO veterans to be included in his statement. Why shouldnt i?

To say it is a spiritual successor to UO dont exclude UO PvP. To leave out just about all details on PvP during kickstarter made many old UO PvP veterans pledge in hope for this game would be the next UO.

So yes, i pledged on Richards words and a hope for this being the next UO with a PvP system close to that old game. And i am far from the only UO PvP veteran that did just that. 

Saying it will be a spiritual successor to UO was what triggered my interest. Little to no information about PvP during kickstarter didnt make it easier. So many old UO PvP veterans have been searching for the next UO and hearing Richard the creator of UO claiming this will be the spiritual successor to UO triggered many of us to pledge. I bet no old UO PvP player that pledged on the words spiritual successor to UO saw a PvP and combat system lamer then WoW coming.

It was a smart move to claim it was a spiritual successor of UO and leave out just about all details on the PvP system. Must have brought him alot of pledgers from the old UO PvP group that were longing for the next UO.

 

 

Because he didn't mention PvP. 

 

Because he counciled patience.  If he was sure what he was doing was what everyone wanted, he would have told everyone to get excited.

 

Because he is a game developer, and game developers never give you any detailed information until much closer to release.  That's because they know they are going to disapoint somebody.

 

Here's some advice.  You didn't ask for advice, but I'm giving you advice anyway.  Take everything a developer says about a game, and filter out anything that isn't actual information about game mechanics or in-game details.  What's left is actionable information.  For instance, what does "Spiritual Successor to UO" tell you?  The only concrete information is that is it a successor to UO, and that something about the game will be reminiscent of UO.  It could be landscapes, graphics, PvP, player trading or something else that you always ignored in the game.  Unless you liked every aspect of the game, there is no reason to think that being a spiritual successor to UO means the game will contain something you like.

 

Now do this for everything single game that gets released because every single developer does this.  "It's great!"  "PvP will be important!"  "We'll have an in-game economy!"  None of these statements actually say anything.  Release after release people keep reading into these statements and buying into games they don't really like.  Stop doing that.  Free yourself.

 

For every large, complex problem, there is a simple, clear solution that also happens to be absolutely wrong.

  Aragon100

Elite Member

Joined: 2/06/08
Posts: 2201

 
OP  3/31/14 8:05:11 AM#29
Originally posted by lizardbones
Originally posted by Aragon100
Originally posted by lizardbones

He said what he said about SotA to everyone, not just the "UO PvP veterans".  There were many more "UO Player veterans" than "UO PvP veterans".  What would you think that what he said was directed at a specific group?  More importantly, why would you think the comment was directed specifically at the group you put yourself in and not the much larger group of players that played on Trammel?

 

It seems to me that the major problem here isn't what he said, it's what you wanted what he said to mean.

 

I expected my group of UO veterans to be included in his statement. Why shouldnt i?

To say it is a spiritual successor to UO dont exclude UO PvP. To leave out just about all details on PvP during kickstarter made many old UO PvP veterans pledge in hope for this game would be the next UO.

So yes, i pledged on Richards words and a hope for this being the next UO with a PvP system close to that old game. And i am far from the only UO PvP veteran that did just that. 

Saying it will be a spiritual successor to UO was what triggered my interest. Little to no information about PvP during kickstarter didnt make it easier. So many old UO PvP veterans have been searching for the next UO and hearing Richard the creator of UO claiming this will be the spiritual successor to UO triggered many of us to pledge. I bet no old UO PvP player that pledged on the words spiritual successor to UO saw a PvP and combat system lamer then WoW coming.

It was a smart move to claim it was a spiritual successor of UO and leave out just about all details on the PvP system. Must have brought him alot of pledgers from the old UO PvP group that were longing for the next UO.

 

 

Because he didn't mention PvP. 

 

Because he counciled patience.  If he was sure what he was doing was what everyone wanted, he would have told everyone to get excited.

 

Because he is a game developer, and game developers never give you any detailed information until much closer to release.  That's because they know they are going to disapoint somebody.

 

Here's some advice.  You didn't ask for advice, but I'm giving you advice anyway.  Take everything a developer says about a game, and filter out anything that isn't actual information about game mechanics or in-game details.  What's left is actionable information.  For instance, what does "Spiritual Successor to UO" tell you?  The only concrete information is that is it a successor to UO, and that something about the game will be reminiscent of UO.  It could be landscapes, graphics, PvP, player trading or something else that you always ignored in the game.  Unless you liked every aspect of the game, there is no reason to think that being a spiritual successor to UO means the game will contain something you like.

 

Now do this for everything single game that gets released because every single developer does this.  "It's great!"  "PvP will be important!"  "We'll have an in-game economy!"  None of these statements actually say anything.  Release after release people keep reading into these statements and buying into games they don't really like.  Stop doing that.  Free yourself.

 

But he mentioned during kickstarter the game would have PvP and he also called it a spiritual successor to UO so it is not far fetched to assume he would deliver a PvP game close to old UO.

Nothing is certain though when it comes to kickstarter and i learned my lesson. 

  lizardbones

Elite Member

Joined: 6/11/08
Posts: 10430

I've become dependent upon spell check. My apologies for stupid grammatical errors.

3/31/14 9:01:01 AM#30
Originally posted by Aragon100
Originally posted by lizardbones
Originally posted by Aragon100
Originally posted by lizardbones

He said what he said about SotA to everyone, not just the "UO PvP veterans".  There were many more "UO Player veterans" than "UO PvP veterans".  What would you think that what he said was directed at a specific group?  More importantly, why would you think the comment was directed specifically at the group you put yourself in and not the much larger group of players that played on Trammel?

 

It seems to me that the major problem here isn't what he said, it's what you wanted what he said to mean.

 

I expected my group of UO veterans to be included in his statement. Why shouldnt i?

To say it is a spiritual successor to UO dont exclude UO PvP. To leave out just about all details on PvP during kickstarter made many old UO PvP veterans pledge in hope for this game would be the next UO.

So yes, i pledged on Richards words and a hope for this being the next UO with a PvP system close to that old game. And i am far from the only UO PvP veteran that did just that. 

Saying it will be a spiritual successor to UO was what triggered my interest. Little to no information about PvP during kickstarter didnt make it easier. So many old UO PvP veterans have been searching for the next UO and hearing Richard the creator of UO claiming this will be the spiritual successor to UO triggered many of us to pledge. I bet no old UO PvP player that pledged on the words spiritual successor to UO saw a PvP and combat system lamer then WoW coming.

It was a smart move to claim it was a spiritual successor of UO and leave out just about all details on the PvP system. Must have brought him alot of pledgers from the old UO PvP group that were longing for the next UO.

 

 

Because he didn't mention PvP. 

 

Because he counciled patience.  If he was sure what he was doing was what everyone wanted, he would have told everyone to get excited.

 

Because he is a game developer, and game developers never give you any detailed information until much closer to release.  That's because they know they are going to disapoint somebody.

 

Here's some advice.  You didn't ask for advice, but I'm giving you advice anyway.  Take everything a developer says about a game, and filter out anything that isn't actual information about game mechanics or in-game details.  What's left is actionable information.  For instance, what does "Spiritual Successor to UO" tell you?  The only concrete information is that is it a successor to UO, and that something about the game will be reminiscent of UO.  It could be landscapes, graphics, PvP, player trading or something else that you always ignored in the game.  Unless you liked every aspect of the game, there is no reason to think that being a spiritual successor to UO means the game will contain something you like.

 

Now do this for everything single game that gets released because every single developer does this.  "It's great!"  "PvP will be important!"  "We'll have an in-game economy!"  None of these statements actually say anything.  Release after release people keep reading into these statements and buying into games they don't really like.  Stop doing that.  Free yourself.

 

But he mentioned during kickstarter the game would have PvP and he also called it a spiritual successor to UO so it is not far fetched to assume he would deliver a PvP game close to old UO.

Nothing is certain though when it comes to kickstarter and i learned my lesson. 

 

Other developers are pretty clear about what they are developing on Kickstarter.  It's not Kickstarter that's the demon.  It's developers who don't give a clear description of their product, and the human ability (obsession?) with connecting dots that may or may not be connected. 

 

Like that space game that pulled in over forty million dollars.  They were pretty clear about what the game would be and what it wouldn't be.  A lot of people have thrown money at that game, and there aren't any threads complaining about people thinking something would be in the game, and it's not going to be there.  It's not impossible for a developer to clearly describe what they are producing, just very rare.

 

For every large, complex problem, there is a simple, clear solution that also happens to be absolutely wrong.

  Astrobia

Novice Member

Joined: 3/21/14
Posts: 23

3/31/14 11:21:25 AM#31

A couple of points...

On the risk vs reward thing their current brainstorming on the matter isn't a plan engraved in stone. THey plan to test it out and tweak to make it more/less harsh as needed till they find the happy medium where getting PK'd is something you want to go out of your way to avoid but you don't feel like quitting the game when it happens.

Also the ransom system (which is different from an insurance system) is just one side of the coin. On the risk element, there also the fact whenever you die, all of your gear is damaged and needs repair, getting PK'd damages it even more than monster based deaths. On the reward side for the PK's part one of the brainstromed idea is you can freely loot resources and consumables, so their gold, crafting materials, potions, some (but not all) of their reagents, food.. And then the ransom system kicks in on a random selection of their combat gear... Which in all likely hood you don't want to steal anyway, as you'll get more from the ransom system than you will trying to sell it, and it is extremely unlikely you will want to use any gear you could steal from them for yourself since they are using an item affinity system. That is each persons gear levels up for themself exclusively. While it might be high level for them it's base level for you and you wouldn't want to switch to it to replace your gear you have affinity with unless it's about to break.

 

Forget the other points... I assume open PVP? There will be modes where you can play one what is effectively a full PVP only shard. Will be much more highly populated then the full PVP shards you see in other games too since they are all merged into the one shard and even the people only temporarily flagging as PVP will pass through it while they are.

  Arglebargle

Hard Core Member

Joined: 6/13/07
Posts: 1054

4/01/14 1:18:03 AM#32
Originally posted by Aragon100
Originally posted by Tbau
Originally posted by Aragon100

spiritual successor,[1][2] sometimes called a spiritual sequel, is a successor to a work of fiction which does not build upon the storyline established by a previous work as do most traditional prequels or sequels, yet features many of the same elements, themes, and styles as its source material, thereby resulting in its nevertheless being related or similar "in spirit" to its predecessor.

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

There is nothing similar "in spirit" when you compare old UO PvP with SotA PvP. SotA is not a spiritual successor to that old Ultima Online game when it comes to PvP. UO was a hardcore PvP game with risk vs reward and consequences. 

PvP was a small part of UO and thus not having a single element of it does not remove it from being its spiritual successor since it contains virtually everything else.

in fact you are one of the few claiming it is not, showing yet again how in the minority your train of thought is.

PvP was a major feature in UO 1997-february 2003. I could go as far as claim it was the main feature that was practiced the most during that time.

And the exodus out, when people could choose, was noteworthy.

 

Garriott says that their envisioned PvP system will fix the endemic griefing of UO.  I don't believe it, but I am going to wait to actually see it before making pronouncements.  As always, if everything has to perfect, the game you play will be the waiting one.

 

Garriott would also have prefered to make a steampunk game, but the weight of his fans (and investors) expectations pushed him back into medieval fantasy UO clone territory.

If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.

  Aragon100

Elite Member

Joined: 2/06/08
Posts: 2201

 
OP  4/01/14 2:44:31 PM#33
Originally posted by Arglebargle
Originally posted by Aragon100
Originally posted by Tbau
Originally posted by Aragon100

spiritual successor,[1][2] sometimes called a spiritual sequel, is a successor to a work of fiction which does not build upon the storyline established by a previous work as do most traditional prequels or sequels, yet features many of the same elements, themes, and styles as its source material, thereby resulting in its nevertheless being related or similar "in spirit" to its predecessor.

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

There is nothing similar "in spirit" when you compare old UO PvP with SotA PvP. SotA is not a spiritual successor to that old Ultima Online game when it comes to PvP. UO was a hardcore PvP game with risk vs reward and consequences. 

PvP was a small part of UO and thus not having a single element of it does not remove it from being its spiritual successor since it contains virtually everything else.

in fact you are one of the few claiming it is not, showing yet again how in the minority your train of thought is.

PvP was a major feature in UO 1997-february 2003. I could go as far as claim it was the main feature that was practiced the most during that time.

As always, if everything has to perfect, the game you play will be the waiting one.

Of course i will wait, why should i play a game where developers again caved in to the never ending whine coming from PvE players. 

This was Richard Garriot's original thought on world safety -

[quote]

What follows is a fictitious example of how I think it could play out. Imagine that newbies and Role Players have safe havens around the world. For PVP'ers this is so far no worse than UO which was VERY open PVP. Now give RP'ers some methods of "safe passage" around the world, that let them RP, but not necessarily have the easiest or most valuable "paths"... Imagine "safe paths" from safety area to safety area. But occasionally these tunnels are discovered and thus unavailable, or that real value is "just off the safe path", beckoning to you to step out of the comfort zones.


Personally, I am a believer, we can get everyone the safety and openness they desire... stay tuned, and keep on commenting!

Thanks,
Richard Garriott 

[/quote]

https://shroudoftheavatar.com/forum/index.php?threads/pvp-defaults-and-other-questions-answered-dev-replied.2002/

 

 

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. 

 

  Jean-Luc_Picard

Elite Member

Joined: 1/10/13
Posts: 2672

There... are... four... lights!

4/06/14 9:42:20 AM#34

How awful, griefers won't be playing this game... you know, the less than 1% of gamers who only play games where they can ruin other player's day. SotA is DOOMED, it only has the 99% remaining player base as potential customer...

I think Richard is just fine, and he has actually shown that he learned from past mistakes and understood why Trammel had to be added to UO for the game to survive.

Playing now: Archeage, WoW, Landmark, GW2

Top 3 MMORPGs played: UO, AC1 and WoW

Honorable mentions: AO, LotRO and GW2.

"The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn. After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that neither does the ability to write.

  Scott23

Advanced Member

Joined: 10/05/10
Posts: 76

4/06/14 10:01:19 AM#35
Originally posted by Aragon100
 

I dont see my money at all well spent since SotA is as far as it could be from that old UO game when it comes to PvP. 

And i do expect developers to stand by their words.

Not to be snide or mean, but has there ever been an instance where developers have stood by their words when it comes to speaking about pre-development to a finished product?

Hype is all well and good, but I always expect massive changes as something is developed.  This is why I seldom  donate pre-production. 

  Aragon100

Elite Member

Joined: 2/06/08
Posts: 2201

 
OP  4/06/14 2:55:55 PM#36
Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard

How awful, griefers won't be playing this game... you know, the less than 1% of gamers who only play games where they can ruin other player's day. SotA is DOOMED, it only has the 99% remaining player base as potential customer...

I think Richard is just fine, and he has actually shown that he learned from past mistakes and understood why Trammel had to be added to UO for the game to survive.

Really? That's why their is an uproar over at SotA forums where old UO PvP players feel they hane been betrayed. Developers gave the game to the PvE players and every suggestion the PvP crowd had was sidestepped by developers. I suggest you inform yourself. And you claiming it is only griefers complaining is laughable at best.

SotA have lost loads of hardcore PvP players. Why should they play a game that only take interest in  PvE players or casual PvP players?

  Aragon100

Elite Member

Joined: 2/06/08
Posts: 2201

 
OP  4/06/14 2:57:15 PM#37
Originally posted by Scott23
Originally posted by Aragon100
 

I dont see my money at all well spent since SotA is as far as it could be from that old UO game when it comes to PvP. 

And i do expect developers to stand by their words.

Not to be snide or mean, but has there ever been an instance where developers have stood by their words when it comes to speaking about pre-development to a finished product?

Hype is all well and good, but I always expect massive changes as something is developed.  This is why I seldom  donate pre-production. 

They say they listen to their community but they only listen to the PvE players.

It is very uncommon to exclude a major part of your community.

  lizardbones

Elite Member

Joined: 6/11/08
Posts: 10430

I've become dependent upon spell check. My apologies for stupid grammatical errors.

4/06/14 4:01:06 PM#38
Originally posted by Aragon100
Originally posted by Jean-Luc_Picard

How awful, griefers won't be playing this game... you know, the less than 1% of gamers who only play games where they can ruin other player's day. SotA is DOOMED, it only has the 99% remaining player base as potential customer...

I think Richard is just fine, and he has actually shown that he learned from past mistakes and understood why Trammel had to be added to UO for the game to survive.

Really? That's why their is an uproar over at SotA forums where old UO PvP players feel they hane been betrayed. Developers gave the game to the PvE players and every suggestion the PvP crowd had was sidestepped by developers. I suggest you inform yourself. And you claiming it is only griefers complaining is laughable at best.

SotA have lost loads of hardcore PvP players. Why should they play a game that only take interest in  PvE players or casual PvP players?

 

Are these the same PvP players that felt betrayed when Trammel released and the majority of the players moved from Felucca to Trammel?  That means they've been playing MMORPGs for a very long time.  They have only themselves to blame for reading what he said and assuming it meant he was doing what they wanted rather than what he wanted.

 

The more important question is why would a developer want to include hard core PvP rules?   A hardcore PvP ruleset will drive off more players than it brings in.  It's the reason most of the players moved over to Trammel when it was available, and it's the reason why most of the players stayed there.  A hard core PvP ruleset eliminates the possibility of including other rulesets.  A hard core ruleset requires that players not be safe.  RG's own words were that the game would have a balance of safety and openness or choice.  A hard core PvP ruleset doesn't allow for that.  So again, why would he, at any point, have included one?

 

For every large, complex problem, there is a simple, clear solution that also happens to be absolutely wrong.

  gothokaos

Novice Member

Joined: 11/28/03
Posts: 141

You play a good game kid... but now you must DIE!

4/13/14 9:15:16 PM#39
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!

  psiic

Hard Core Member

Joined: 6/03/09
Posts: 566

4/13/14 9:41:08 PM#40

Is it ok for me to now say I told you so?

 

I called this as a kickstarter con artist robbery project in the first place.

 

Gets a ton of free money spends a fraction of that money on a pos game, pockets the rest and walks away laughing.

4 Pages « 1 2 3 4 » Search