So... mixed review on steam

highlighted by me, I disagree, the instanced map was known from day one.

 

I agree with @rune_74 and @HoustonDragon.

The complaints of the single-player fans seem more understandable to me. It was announced at Kickstarter that we'd have an overland map and there would be consensual PvP. There have been no surprises in that regard. Some UO fans might have not liked that, but it was announced that way at the beginning.

At the current moment, however, I think single-player fans can rightfully complain about the fact that the game is grindy (like in UO) and there's a focus on sandbox gameplay (like in UO). But most of the complaints I think should still be put on hold, since the game is still coming together. What we can do on the forums on the players is just make it clear what we expect from the game and where we want the game to go. The forums can use more of that sort of constructive discussion. The devs will listen to us; they have in the past.

The only thing I'm worried about with the hammer coming down on deadlines is that the devs might cut corners to get things done on time and then it'll be a big job to make everything backwards-compatible after release.

At the moment, I'm still standing by Positive review on Steam, as the game elements I described were going to be coming are slowly coming in. The weather and astronomy systems are a great, foundational aspect of the game world, and I haven't seen anything like that in any of the single-player RPGs or MMOs I've played. Fishing will be tied to time of day and weather, and I hope wildlife will be, too. It should also not be that difficult to tie combat to weather and the environment.

Just again, as I said, I'm worried about the devs rushing the content for the deadlines.

 

I think a big problem is the general audience of early access users on Steam.

It is almost ALWAYS a huge mistake to launch on Steam early access. I understand the push, but if you don't have a really, and I mean REALLY solid (in)complete game to offer, people are going to be disappointed. Lots of games have crap reviews in early access.

Consumers see a game launch on Steam, it's available for purchase, the advertisement seems to do it justice. They buy it, realize it's horribly incomplete, and write a negative review, because they are uninformed.

It shouldn't be rocket science as to wonder what happened. Portalarium made the decision to bring the game to Steam way, way, WAY before it was ready for public consumption, and the price is mediocre reviews, for now.

 

Thank you for your non informative post in which you obviously have very little recent info to back up.

I think a lot of people don't know anything about game development.
Enjoy other games, good bye

 

I reluctantly buy in to this discussion.
I was always under the impression that this game was not and was never going to be Ultima X. Nor was it or was it ever going to be UO2. This is a game from the team that brought us these great adventures. It will have similar ethos, similar playstyles, but many elements will be radically different.
Complaining that "it is not UO" or "it is not Ultima" is about as sensible as purchasing a totally new book from George R R Martin (for instance) and complaining that it's not "Game of Thrones". If you loved his writing style and gift for narration and suspense, you will probably love the new book - you just have to accept that it's a different story.
My total guess is that there are a number of folk who did not quite grasp this distinction, and came in expecting an update from something they loved in the past. Combine that with a very heavy financial investment, and it may help to explain a growing sense of disillusionment, (This is not what I thought it would be.....) eventually prompting some to pull out.
I agree with all those who said that it is not yet complete - we haven't even seen the main storyline. Which by all accounts will be absorbing and compelling.
My advice and encouragement to all who can accept it - this is a new game, not a rehash of something past. There will be similarities, but it is not the same. Comparisons are not helpful, and the only fair way to judge it is to wait until it is complete and view it with a completely open mind.
I for one am very happy with the development and direction; I hope the majority of you are also.

 

Well the good news is I am no longer heavily invested....(heavily invested for me was not what some of you high rollers spent.) So now I only have a value of a normal game
, even so I see things I do not like and wish were better.

At the current scope and what is completed I do not see a game I like.

The focus has been entirely on multiplayer and how the online world will work. They did recently announce that they will begin to work on the Offline stuff in March....which seems like a short period to get it up and going. Let's be real here, there is a ton of work to do still. I don't see them having the man power to do what they need in the time allotted if they expect to launch in August.

I think their are a number of people who are failing to grasp that they have changed the focus since kickstarter to a MMO that can be played offline. They took pains to say it was not a MMO in t he kickstarter to only later go back and call if a MMO after! If you can't or won't see why that is an issue to those of us who thought we were getting a better non MMO experience then I don't know what to say.

I know quite a bit a about game development, I also know telling people to go away is probably not the best way to advance a game.

 

@rune_74,

Originally, they wanted to market it as Selective Multiplayer Online. But they were never pitching it as single-player either. I think, over time, they just found people were confused by SMO and gaming websites didn't even have an appropriate category, and just categorized it as MMO.

I think its as simple as that. Its marketing, not gameplay.

And while I think the people upset that its not Open PvP don't have anything to complain about, they did also promise "meaningful PvP", which in the beginning included things like guilds taking over control points, contraband quests, extra resources in shardfalls, etc. Content that definitely wasn't geared to single-player -- multiplayer content. I'd lump that into the list of things that the devs still have to work on and get in the game, and which we should be having constructive discussions on in the forums.

 

I think that is part of it for sure....SMO to MMO...but I also think they have pushed more in the "virtual world" as a income generator. I'm not a "high end" backer, I don't really contribute more anymore. I think it is an unfortunate thing that the game has to have the have and have nots to be made....which goes counter to what I think they were originally trying to make. I think they are going to have a very hard time getting new players, who wants to come play when they are already so far behind?

I still see it as a MP game that can now be played offline, which may or may not have some extra features depending on time. Hopefully I get my 45 dollars out of it still.

 

I just want to chime in as a fairly quiet lurker here. I have played Ultimas since IV and some UO and don't consider myself an MMO player - although I've dabbled in everquest and others as well.

I am very happy with the game as it is now from a gameplay point of view. In my opinion all it needs now is some more variety in critters, crafts and of course the story/quests.

I find myself constantly battling the urge to play, vs not wanting to ruin the story (having to run through the same partial quests after every wipe). I seem to keep playing anyway, so the devs are doing something right. For me, the most important thing will be the end of character wipes so I can truly commit to the story. I don't want spoilers before it's "real" - I dislike having to redo the same quests again due to wipes. So I (like everyone here) eagerly await that wipe-free day.

My time is much more limited that the majority of people that post here seem to have. I am probably not alone. Anyway, I'll just keep exploring for the hat quests and enjoy the scenic views* the level builders are putting into the game. Oh. I guess the other thing I await are optimisations - so I can enjoy those scenes with full effects on the best setting and enjoy some less laggy scenes!

So I guess what I'm hearing from the devs - as much as I can glean from the few updates I have time to watch in detail - is right on par with my expectations. The foundation seems laid; they are holding back on story to avoid spoilers; they are building scenes; they are populating databases for crafting; they are optimizing. I feel they are on track. I just wanted to voice my opinion, which other lurkers may not have time or inclination to write.

see you all in game.

*PS, my favourite view so far was from the top of a small trail that led steeply up past some active gysers to a breathtaking view overlooking a lake and the distant wall of the fortress of hilt - just visible in the mountain face through a foggy evening haze. Fantastic. I should go back and take a pic.

 

@rune_74,

They're definitely building the game too much on the add-on store for my tastes, which IMO is a legitimate thing to complain about. It does have a major impact on a lot of aspects of RPGs that single-player fans care about.

Other than that, I think we're just seeing a lot of delays in content. Probably, some of the add-on store stuff is justified by the fact that there are delays and they need funding. But that's a Catch-22 situation, because I don't think speeding it up will help the single-player side of things, either.

I want to see the game to move in the right direction; I just don't think the negativity helps. I think the devs want to create a great game.

 

If they want to create a great game people have to be honest with them then.

 

There is only one requirement for a game to be an "Ultima game". That is Richard Garriott. His stories is what makes it.

Anyone can create an Ultima-type of game but it is NOTnan Ultima. many fans have tried but still NOT an Ultima.

SotA is the best of both the stand alone Ultimas and Ultima Online games.

 

From what I see, the majority of add-on store items are assets they need in game anyway, but they put variants of them in the store for those willing to spend for something special. It's never game-breaking stuff - and more importantly, never stuff I feel they were not building to use in the game somwhere ( in other words, I don't feel they've redirected any development time on them)

 

Kick starter games are relative new to not only us but the devs too. Good designers/Developers are notoriously late on deadlines ( something that is less seen with publishers ). The biggest mistake a dev/designer ( without a Publisher or with less publisher influence ) can make is giving a fixed deadlines.
EG,, If anyone knows about Star Citizen you will certainly know about Christ Roberts been told to " NOT GIVE OUT RELEASE DATES" and this is a well known fact in the SC community. In the not so long ago beginning there was all kinds of issues with the community and sites out there with deadlines not being met all over and now "Were working on it though officially "Its out when its out" " and things are MUCH MUCH better..

So if anything is the fault then it would be the devs stating static dates for releases.. they should have perhaps rephrased there times frames perhaps something like this " With the present funding been what it is we can give an approximate development range between 3 - 4 years and playable within less...-- this range may increase depending on funding or community request"

This way they don't get in trouble with the community so much as funds pour in.. and if they release it early they have all to win.. We all do not mind it earlier ( as long as its polished of course ) but as soon as its late on a deadline our anxiety goes up and that's when some take it to frustration and what not..

 

The things that single-player fans are complaining about are the immersion breaking stuff, like placing obsidian towers in cities, and some of the holiday items. Also things that should probably tied to game systems, and making them add-on items makes that problematic. Its not so much a complaint about the development time.

I've heard some of the multiplayer fans complain about the development time put into add-on items, but its a different complaint.

 

I don't see the point in writing reviews for games still in development. We all have an awesome opportunity to be involved, to varying degrees, with the way this game progresses in development. We aren't playing Shroud of The Avatar we are playing some version of a game that may become that game at some point Either get involved by testing out and playing a wide variety of things and feel lucky to check out the process of creation happening, or go do something else and try it again when it's completed. There is no need to play this game right now as if it were some serious part of your life or time unless you are dedicated to the outcome in someway.
I think it's fun to try out unfinished things and brainstorm on possibilities and potential (I'd prefer to get paid to do that - Portalarium is getting a huge service for free by including dedicated fans in development discussions...remember beta/alpha game testers?)

 

Everyone starts at (literally) the same level. Progression from that point on is closely tied to the amount of time you spend in game, and how you spend it. Starting with a castle isn't going to get you to GM any faster than someone who starts with just the clothes on his back and a rusty bridge sword.

Nobody who starts playing when E1 is launched will be behind, and newcomers with plenty of time will have a definite advantage over existing heavy investors who cannot play as often.

 

That's like saying George Lucas has to be at the helm for a movie to be "Star Wars".

I think that's been properly debunked by now.

Star Wars, Ultima, many things were made by people with some great ideas, but it doesn't mean others are incapable or even better equipped to carry the torch.

(I am not saying that SotA needs to get rid of LB, btw. )

 

ah, ya. ok I get that. I do sometimes wish there were zoning and bylaws in some towns.

It does seems better to me now than in the earlier days - less gaudy. Maybe because there is more variety of housing. Excessive player lot merchants always bug me in mmo's as well - and ad flyers for their wares in public vendors. its like spam - and what is up with those weird 'hoarder' lots - full of every object they've collected. I tend to stay out of player owned towns for the most part, but player lots are in the outskirts of every town.

Like real life, there's no accounting for those wacky neighbours that staple empty soda bottles or old doll heads all over the outside of their house.

 

I think it has more to do with the game feeling very empty if you do not get connected with existing players early. Lacking global chat kinda make it tough for new people to get the ball rolling unless they do extend research upfront.

That's how I felt since I pledged back in 2014. In last December, I was fortunate enough to have some time to browse through the forum and connected up with several other players. It did make a big difference after that from my experience.